The incidence of early recurrent venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) receive anticoagulation for at least 3 months. To evaluate recurrence risk thereafter, some strategies include D-dimer testing after discontinuing anticoagulation, which raises concern about early recurrence. Objectives: To assess the incidence of recurrent VTE within 30 days after stopping anticoagulation. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of EMBASE, CENTRAL, and MEDLINE to identify controlled trials and cohort studies of adult noncancer patients with deep vein thrombosis of the leg and/or pulmonary embolism treated with anticoagulants for ≥3 months. The primary outcome was symptomatic VTE within 30 days. The risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled recurrence rates were calculated using fixed random-effects meta-analyses. Results: = .1). Findings regarding age were inconsistent. None of the recurrences was fatal. The overall risk of bias was low. Conclusion: The incidence of early VTE recurrence after stopping anticoagulation is low. Temporarily discontinuing therapy to assess recurrence risk, therefore, appears safe and may aid in guiding treatment duration.
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 | 0.014 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".