MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407867419 · doi:10.1681/asn.20233411b12a

Strategies for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation in PatiEnts Receiving Dialysis (SAFE-D)

2023· article· en· W4407867419 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ziv Harel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationMedicineDialysisIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients receiving maintenance dialysis. The role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in this population is uncertain as dialysis recipients were excluded from landmark randomized control trials (RCTs). Methods: Objective: To investigate the feasibility of conducting a full-scale RCT to assess the efficacy and safety of OAC in dialysis recipients with AF. Design, setting, and participants: We conducted a parallel-group, open-label allocation- concealed pilot RCT from December 2019 to December 2022 at 28 centres in Canada and Australia (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03987711). We included adults (≥18 y) undergoing maintenance dialysis with a history of non-valvular AF who met CHADS-65 criteria (i.e. age ≥65 y or the presence of at least one stroke risk factor). Exclusion criteria included contraindications to warfarin or apixaban, the need for anticoagulation for conditions other than AF and lack of clinician equipoise. Interventions: Dialysis recipients were randomized 1:1:1, stratified by centre, to receive dose-adjusted warfarin (targeting an INR of 2-3), apixaban, or no OAC. Follow-up was 26 weeks. Outcomes: We identified two thresholds for feasibility: recruitment of the target population within 24 months and retention of ≥80% of participants in their allocated arm at the end of follow-up. Principal secondary outcomes were ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, and bleeding (defined by International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis criteria). Results: We screened 892 patients and enrolled 151(mean age 71.6 ± 10 y; 25% women; CHADS2-VASc score 4 (IQR 3-5); prior stroke, 13%, prior major bleeding, 9%) who were allocated to apixaban (n =51), warfarin (n=52) or no OAC (n=48). We completed recruitment in 30 months (allowing for pauses related to the pandemic) and 83% of participants completed follow-up in their allocated treatment arm. Stroke occurred in 2 participants (1 apixaban, 1 no OAC), and 27 participants had at least one bleeding event (12 warfarin, 8 apixaban, 7 no OAC) of which 8 were major (4 warfarin, 2 apixaban, 2 no OAC). Death occurred in 15 participants (9 warfarin, 2 apixaban, 4 no OAC). Time in the therapeutic range for warfarin users was 58% (IQR 47%-70%). Conclusions: This pilot RCT supports the feasibility of conducting a definitive RCT to inform the effect of OAC on clinical outcomes in dialysis recipients with AF. Funding: Government Support - Non-U.S.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207