Rationale and Design of the Rivaroxaban Post-Transradial Access for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion Trial (CAPITAL-RAPTOR)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Transradial access (TRA) has rapidly emerged as the preferred vascular access site for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. Radial artery occlusion (RAO) remains as an important complication of TRA as it precludes future ipsilateral transradial procedures. While intraprocedural anticoagulation has been studied extensively, the definitive role of postprocedural anticoagulation has not yet been established. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Rivaroxaban Post-Transradial Access for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion trial is a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint design study investigating the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban to reduce the incidence of RAO. Eligible patients will undergo randomisation to receive either rivaroxaban 15 mg once daily for 7 days or to no additional postprocedural anticoagulation. Doppler ultrasound to assess radial artery patency will be performed at 30 days. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board (approval number 20180319-01H). The study results will be disseminated via conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03630055.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".