MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307504129 · doi:10.1093/ehjqcco/qcac069

Kidney function and the comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants vs. warfarin in adults with atrial fibrillation: a multicenter observational study

2022· article· en· W4307504129 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Min Jun, Anish Scaria, Jason G. Andrade, Sunil V. Badve, Peter Birks, Sarah E. Bota, Anna Campain, Ognjenka Djurdjev, Amit X. Garg, Jeffrey T. Ha, Ziv Harel, Brenda R. Hemmelgarn, Carinna Hockham, Matthew T. James, Meg Jardine, Adeera Levin, Eric McArthur, Pietro Ravani, Selena Shao, Manish M. Sood, Zhi Tan, Navdeep Tangri, Reid Whitlock, Martin Gallagher

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaOttawa HospitalLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of AlbertaSeven Oaks General HospitalSt. Michael's HospitalWestern UniversityVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWarfarinAtrial fibrillationMedicineObservational studyRenal functionInternal medicineCardiologyMulticenter studyMajor bleedingRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin in adults with atrial fibrillation (AF) by level of kidney function. METHODS AND RESULTS: We pooled findings from five retrospective cohorts (2011-18) across Australia and Canada of adults with; a new dispensation for a DOAC or warfarin, an AF diagnosis, and a measure of baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The outcomes of interest, within 1 year from the cohort entry date, were: (1) the composite of all-cause death, first hospitalization for ischaemic stroke, or transient ischaemic attack (effectiveness), and (2) first hospitalization for major bleeding defined as an intracranial, upper or lower gastrointestinal, or other bleeding (safety). Cox models were used to examine the association of a DOAC vs. warfarin with outcomes, after 1:1 matching via a propensity score. Kidney function was categorized as eGFR ≥60, 45-59, 30-44, and <30 mL/min/1.73 m2. A total of 74 542 patients were included in the matched analysis. DOAC initiation was associated with greater or similar effectiveness compared with warfarin initiation across all eGFR categories [pooled HRs (95% CIs) for eGFR categories: 0.74(0.69-0.79), 0.76(0.54-1.07), 0.68(0.61-0.75) and 0.86(0.76-0.98)], respectively. DOAC initiation was associated with lower or similar risk of major bleeding than warfarin initiation [pooled HRs (95% CIs): 0.75(0.65-0.86), 0.81(0.65-1.01), 0.82(0.66-1.02), and 0.71(0.52-0.99), respectively). Associations between DOAC initiation, compared with warfarin initiation, and study outcomes were not modified by eGFR category. CONCLUSION: DOAC use, compared with warfarin use, was associated with a lower or similar risk of all-cause death, ischaemic stroke, and transient ischaemic attack and also a lower or similar risk of major bleeding across all levels of kidney function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.241
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical OutcomesSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207