MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391485351 · doi:10.1186/s41927-024-00376-9

Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis of observational studies

2024· article· en· W4391485351 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra A. Fazal, Ana Michelle Avina-Galindo, Shelby Marozoff, Jessie Kwan, Na Lu, J. Antonio Aviña‐Zubieta

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Rheumatology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsArthritis Research Centre of CanadaResearch CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary embolismInternal medicineRheumatoid arthritisDeep veinMeta-analysisPopulationThrombosisVenous thrombosisConfidence intervalObservational studyCohort studyHazard ratioSubgroup analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Thrombotic events, such as venous thromboembolism (VTE) are a major health complication linked to rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of VTE, including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), in adults with RA compared to the general population. Methods MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to April 2022 to identify publications meeting the following criteria: (1) prospective and retrospective original data from cohort or case-control studies; (2) pre-specified RA definition; (3) clearly defined VTE outcomes; (4) reported risk estimate and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs); (5) at least sex- and age-matched to comparison group; and (6) English language. Of 372 studies screened, 14 were included (602,760 RA patients, 123,076 VTE events) and their quality was assessed by an adaptation of the STROBE quality scoring scale. Results The pooled risk ratios of VTE, DVT and PE in patients with RA were 1.57 (95% CI 1.41–1.76), 1.58 (95% CI 1.26–1.97) and 1.57 (95% CI 1.30–1.88), respectively. The I 2 value of 92%, 94% and 92% for VTE, DVT and PE analyses, suggesting considerable heterogeneity. There were no significant differences in risk estimates among the five subgroup analyses: quality score ( P = 0.35, I 2 = 0%); sex ( P = 0.31, I 2 = 1.7%); study year ( P = 0.81, I 2 = 0%); population source ( P = 0.35, I 2 = 0%); study design ( P = 0.62, I 2 = 0%). Conclusions Results show that patients with RA are at a higher risk of VTE, DVT and PE compared to the general population.

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 score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC RheumatologySame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207