MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321604810 · doi:10.1007/s12325-022-02391-z

Venous Thromboembolism Recurrence Among Patients Who Abandon Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in the USA: A Retrospective Longitudinal Study

2023· article· en· W4321604810 on OpenAlexaff
Mark J. Alberts, Maryia Zhdanava, Dominic Pilon, Gabrielle Caron‐Lapointe, Patrick Lefèbvre, Brahim Bookhart, Akshay Kharat

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
FundersJanssen Scientific Affairs
KeywordsMedicineVenous thromboembolismAnticoagulant therapyRetrospective cohort studyRheumatologyInternal medicineOral anticoagulantIntensive care medicineWarfarinAtrial fibrillationThrombosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Among patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are recommended for preventing thromboembolic recurrence, complications, and mortality. This study compared the risk of VTE recurrence among patients who abandoned their first DOAC fill ("abandoners") relative to patients who did not ("non-abandoners"). METHODS: , April 1, 2017 to October 31, 2020. Patients who abandoned their first (index) DOAC fill were classified as abandoners and patients with an approved index DOAC fill as non-abandoners. Baseline characteristics were balanced between cohorts using inverse probability of treatment weighting. VTE recurrence based on the first post-index VTE event (deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) was ascertained and compared between cohorts using weighted Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models during the follow-up period (i.e., index DOAC fill date to end of clinical activity or data availability). RESULTS: After weighting, 152,443 and 153,931 patients comprised the abandoner and non-abandoner cohorts, respectively (mean age 60 years; 53% female; mean follow-up duration 15 months). After 3 months of follow-up, the probability of VTE recurrence was 7.74% in the abandoner cohort and 4.65% in the non-abandoner cohort; the risk of recurrence was 72% higher in the abandoner versus non-abandoner cohort (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.72 [1.64, 1.82]; p < 0.0001). At 12 months, the probability of recurrence was 9.91% in the abandoner cohort and 6.89% in the non-abandoner cohort; the risk of recurrence was 53% higher in the abandoner versus non-abandoner cohort (1.53 [1.46, 1.61]; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Patients abandoning the first DOAC fill had significantly higher risk of VTE recurrence compared to patients who did not abandon the first fill. Ensuring proper access and encouraging early and continuous use of DOACs may help prevent severe and fatal complications among patients with VTE.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in TherapySame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207