MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Anticoagulation stewardship: Improving adherence to clinical guidelines and reducing overuse of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients

2024· article· en· W4396807608 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Tony Wan, S. Jayne Garland, C. Taylor Drury, Justin Lambert, Joshua Yoon, Melissa Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueThrombosis Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersProvidence Health Care
KeywordsMedicineVenous thromboembolismGuidelineIntensive care medicineAuditStewardship (theology)Multidisciplinary approachPsychological interventionEmergency medicineSurgeryNursingThrombosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adherence to guideline recommendations for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (VTE) in hospitalized medical patients is suboptimal despite national policies and institutional interventions. The aim of this quality improvement project was to improve adherence to guidelines and decrease the overuse of VTE prophylaxis in order to reduce the institutional cost for heparins. A multidisciplinary anticoagulation stewardship program (ACSP) using the audit and feedback strategy was implemented on the medicine inpatient units at a teaching hospital in Canada. The primary outcome measure was a comparison, pre and post introduction of the ACSP, of the costs per 6-month period for prophylactic dose enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin on the medicine units. The balancing measures were the 90-day VTE rate and major bleeding rate during the hospitalization. Six months after the implementation of the ACSP, the cost was decreased by >50 % without any observed negative impact on patient safety. This study demonstrates the potential for anticoagulation stewardship programs to optimize the use of VTE prophylaxis and reduce the associated costs and risks.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThrombosis ResearchSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207