MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416754428 · doi:10.1101/2025.11.25.25340065

Statistical Analysis Plan for the Treatment of Cardiovascular disease with low dose Rivaroxaban in Advanced CKD (TRACK) trial

2025· preprint· W4416754428 on OpenAlexaff
Laurent Billot, Muh Geot Wong, An S. De Vriese, David Collister, Adrien Flahault, Lily Mushahar, Raja Ramachandran, Habib Skhiri, Ahmed M. Shaman, Jan Menne, Martin Gallagher

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRivaroxabanClinical trialDiseaseKidney diseaseStroke (engine)Proportional hazards modelHazard ratioCoronary artery diseaseAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1 Abstract The Treatment of cardiovascular disease with low dose Rivaroxaban in Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease (TRACK) trial is a randomised quadruple-blind phase IV clinical trial to determine whether low-dose rivaroxaban (2.5 mg daily) reduces the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to placebo. It aims to recruit approximately 2,000 patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (stages 4, 5 or dialysis-dependent) and an elevated cardiovascular risk. This statistical analysis plan pre-specifies the method of analysis for every outcome and key variable collected in the trial. The primary outcome is the time from randomisation to first occurrence of major cardiovascular event including death from cardiovascular cause, myocardial infarction, stroke or peripheral artery disease event. The primary analysis will consist in a Cox proportional hazard model adjusted for stratification variables. The analysis plan also includes planned sensitivity analyses including covariate adjustments and subgroup analyses.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0830.008

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
GenreProtocol

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→