American Society of Hematology/International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2024 updated guidelines for treatment of venous thromboembolism in pediatric patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The American Society of Hematology (ASH) guidelines on treatment of pediatric venous thromboembolism (VTE) were published in 2018. In the last 6 years, there has been a 10-fold increase in the number of children involved in VTE treatment trials. OBJECTIVE: The ASH Committee on Quality and Guidelines agreed to update the pediatric guidelines in conjunction with the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH). These ASH/ISTH evidence-based guidelines are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in the management of pediatric patients with VTE. METHODS: ASH/ISTH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. An unconflicted patient representative was not identified. The University of Kansas Health System supported the guideline development process, updating or performing systematic evidence reviews up to 2024. The panel focused specifically on the 2018 questions for which there was the greatest amount of interim data. The panel used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 20 recommendations and also provided implementation guidance on the optimal use of anticoagulants in pediatric patients. Key recommendations of these guidelines include the role of DOACs in the treatment of a variety of pediatric VTEs. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is required. Key priorities are understanding the natural history of clinically unsuspected thrombosis across a range of patient subpopulations and obtaining real-world data on the use of DOACs in children.
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 | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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".