Surgery for Patients Undergoing Anticoagulant Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dental surgeries in patients under anticoagulant therapy are considered crucial and are done after careful monitoring of the patient's medical history and blood reports. This is due to the uncontrolled bleeding that is possible to occur following invasive treatment in such patients.Perioperative management of chronically anticoagulated patients and/or patients treated with antiplatelet therapy is a complex medical problem (1).More than half of all hematologists, oral surgeons, and maxillofacial surgeons surveyed in Ontario in 2005 routinely interrupted anticoagulation therapy for tooth extractions (2). Surveys from other countries report that many dental professionals are unaware of their patients' coagulation status, and still discontinue antiplatelet therapy unnecessarily (3). Thus In 1954, the American Heart Association recommended a therapeutic range for oral anticoagulant therapy of a prothrombin time ratio (PTR) of 2 -2.5 using human brain reagents (4). This article deals with the various methods available to avoid the uncontrolled bleeding following dental treatments in anticoagulated patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".