MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4384029915 · doi:10.36660/ijcs.20220115

Adherence and Quality of Life in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation With Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists: A Systematic Review

2023· review· en· W4384029915 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Vanelise Zortéa, Karine Duarte Curvello, Diogo Pilger, Antonios Douros, Lisiane Freitas Leal, Tatiana da Silva Sempé, Tatiane da Silva Dal Pizzol

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cardiovascular Sciences · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do SulConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationCINAHLMEDLINEVitamin kQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicineIntensive care medicinePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Direct anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) differ in pharmacokinetic characteristics, intensity of required laboratory monitoring, and costs. These differences could affect patients’ adherence to treatment and quality of life (QoL). Objective To assess whether patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) using DOACs have better treatment adherence and QoL when compared to patients using VKAs. Methods We conducted a systematic review in Medline, Embase, LILACS, SciELO, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central, until June 9, 2021. We included studies [...]

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Cardiovascular Sciences→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→