MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376276256 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070720

Rationale and Design of the Rivaroxaban Post-Transradial Access for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion Trial (CAPITAL-RAPTOR)

2023· article· en· W4376276256 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pietro Di Santo, Omar Abdel‐Razek, Richard G. Jung, Simon Parlow, Anthony Poulin, Jordan Bernick, Baylie Morgan, Lisa Robinson, Hannah Feagan, Jilliane Wade, Cheng Yee Goh, Kuljit Singh, Michael Froeschl, Marino Labinaz, Dean Fergusson, Doug Coyle, Kwadwo Kyeremanteng, Joseph Abunassar, George A. Wells, Trevor Simard, Benjamin Hibbert

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Procedures and Complications
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadial arteryRivaroxabanPercutaneous coronary interventionPercutaneousSurgeryOcclusionWarfarinInternal medicineArteryMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.012

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicVascular Procedures and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207