MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353015402 · doi:10.1007/s12325-023-02483-4

Ischemic Stroke and Systemic Embolism Among One-and-Done Direct Oral Anticoagulant Users with Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation

2023· article· en· W4353015402 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
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
FundersJanssen Scientific Affairs
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationInternal medicineCardiologyStroke (engine)EmbolismRheumatologyOral anticoagulantAnticoagulantIschemic strokeRivaroxabanWarfarinIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are essential in ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (SE) prevention among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This study compared the risk of ischemic stroke/SE among patients with NVAF who discontinued DOACs following the first fill ("one-and-done") relative to patients who continued DOACs beyond the first fill ("continuers"). METHODS: , April 1, 2017 to October 31, 2020, were used to identify adults with NVAF initiated on DOACs (index date). Patients with only one DOAC claim during the 90-day landmark period starting on the index date were classified as one-and-done and the remaining as continuers. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics in the cohorts. Time from the landmark period end to the first ischemic stroke/SE event or, among those without the event, to clinical activity or data end was compared between balanced cohorts using survival analysis. RESULTS: Of patients initiating DOACs, 23.6% were classified as one-and-done users. After weighting was performed, 241,159 and 238,889 patients comprised the one-and-done and continuer cohorts, respectively. At 12 months of follow-up, the probability of ischemic stroke/SE was 1.44% in the one-and-done cohort and 1.00% in the continuer cohort [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) 1.44 (1.34-1.54); p < 0.0001]. Results at earlier and later time points and in a sensitivity analysis with a 75-day landmark period were similar. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of patients were one-and-done DOAC users, which was associated with significantly higher risk of ischemic stroke/SE events. There is an unmet need to improve access and encourage continuous use of DOACs among patients with NVAF so that severe and fatal complications may be mitigated.

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)0.000
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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207