Role of Vena Cava Filter in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Injured Adult Patients: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Practice Management Guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma [RETRACTED]
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Injured patients are at an increased risk of developing deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters have been used in injured patients to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE), but current evidence-based guidelines are lacking. Methods Questions regarding IVC filter use in injured patients with clearly defined Population(s), Intervention(s), Comparison(s), and appropriately selected Outcomes (PICO) were formulated. The study sought to understand the evidence behind use of ultra short term IVC filters and use of IVC filters in injured patients with and without known VTE who are unable to receive therapeutic anticoagulation and chemoprophylaxis, respectively. A literature search and review was conducted, followed by meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was assessed per Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results There were twenty-one studies that were analyzed. Three studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), three were observational studies, and fifteen studies were retrospective studies. In injured patients without known acute VTE who cannot receive chemoprophylaxis, we recommend against placement of an IVC filter due to associated higher rate of mortality, DVT, PE, and length of stay. The quality of evidence was assessed to be low. In injured patients with known DVT who cannot receive chemoprophylaxis we conditionally recommend against placement of an IVC filter. The quality of evidence was assessed to be very low. No recommendations can be made with respect to placement of ultra short term IVC filters based upon available data. Conclusion IVC filters should not be placed routinely for prophylaxis in injured adult patients without known VTE who cannot receive chemoprophylaxis. The taskforce conditionally recommends against the placement of IVC filter in injured adult patients with known DVT who cannot receive chemoprophylaxis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Guideline; Systematic review/meta-analysis, level IV
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".