Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Heparin and coumarins have been in clinical use for more than 50 years. Low-molecular-weight heparins (including a heparinoid), developed 25 years ago, have been used clinically for more than a decade. METHODS: In the last 10 years, several new anticoagulants that target almost every step in the coagulation pathway have been developed. Of these, 3 direct thrombin inhibitors (hirudin, bivalirudin, and argatroban) are approved for clinical use. Four other anticoagulants (activated protein C, tissue factor pathway inhibitor, synthetic pentasaccharide, and the oral thrombin inhibitor H376/95) are being evaluated or have completed evaluation in phase III studies; various other compounds are in phase II studies. RESULTS: The mechanism of action, sites of action, and potential clinical indications of these new anticoagulants are reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: To compete effectively, the new oral anticoagulants currently under development will have to be at least as effective and safe as coumarins, oral thrombin, or Factor Xa inhibitors and require less monitoring.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.009 |
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".