MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rivaroxaban Versus Apixaban: A Comparison Without a Simple Solution

2024· article· en· W4399518055 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Cohen, Alex C. Spyropoulos, Shaun G. Goodman, Sarah A. Spinler, Marc P. Bonaca, Theresa M Redling, Gautam Visveswaran, Sumit Sohal

Bibliographic record

VenueMayo Clinic Proceedings Innovations Quality & Outcomes · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCanadian VIGOUR CentreHeart and Stroke FoundationCanadian Heart Research CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineApixabanRivaroxabanSimple (philosophy)Internal medicineAtrial fibrillationWarfarin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the original Beers Criteria were developed in 1991 and subsequently expanded in 1997, the American Geriatric Society (AGS) Beers Criteria has become a very useful source of information to optimize patient safety and minimize patient harm in older adults (age older than 65 years).1 Recently, the AGS published its 2023 updated AGS Beers Criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults.2 This 2023 publication reviewed evidence published between 2017 and 2022 in order to update the previously published AGS 2019 Beers Criteria.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.295
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMayo Clinic Proceedings Innovations Quality & OutcomesSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207