1,721,015 research outputs found
ACP Journal Club. Review: Routine venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized frail older patients has uncertain benefit.
No full text[No abstract available]Kahn SR, 2012, CHEST, V141, pe195S; Qaseem A, 2011, ANN INTERN MED, V155, P625, DOI 10.7326-0003-4819-155-9-201111010-000110
In intermediate-risk acute PE, tenecte-plase plus heparin reduced hemodynamic decompensation but increased stroke: Commentary
No full text[No abstract available
Duration of anticoagulant therapy for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism
No full textIt takes about 3 months to complete active treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE), with further treatment serving to prevent new episodes of thrombosis (pure secondary prevention). Consequently, VTE should generally be treated for either 3 months or indefinitely (exceptions will be described in the text). The decision to stop anticoagulants at 3 months or to treat indefinitely is dominated by the long-term risk of recurrence, and secondarily influenced by the risk of bleeding and by patient preference. VTE provoked by a reversible risk factor, or a first unprovoked isolated distal (calf) deep vein thrombosis (DVT), has a low risk of recurrence and is usually treated for 3 months. VTE associated with active cancer, or a second unprovoked VTE, has a high risk of recurrence and is usually treated indefinitely. The decision to stop anticoagulants at 3 months or to treat indefinitely is more finely balanced after a first unprovoked proximal DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE). Indefinite anticoagulation is often chosen if there is a low risk of bleeding, whereas anticoagulation is usually stopped at 3 months if there is a high risk of bleeding. The decision to continue anticoagulation indefinitely after a first unprovoked proximal DVT or PE is strengthened if the patient is male, the index event was PE rather than DVT, and-or D-dimer testing is positive 1 month after stopping anticoagulant therapy. © 2014 by The American Society of Hematology.Adam SS, 2012, ANN INTERN MED, V157, P796, DOI 10.7326-0003-4819-157-10-201211200-00532; Agnelli G, 2003, ANN INTERN MED, V139, P19; Agnelli G, 2013, NEW ENGL J MED, V368, P699, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa1207541; Agnelli G, 2001, NEW ENGL J MED, V345, P165, DOI 10.1056-NEJM200107193450302; Akl EA, 2011, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002-14651858.CD006650.pub3; Baglin T, 2012, J Thromb Haemost, V10, P698, DOI 10.1111-j.1538-7836.2012.04662.x; Baglin T, 2010, J THROMB HAEMOST, V8, P2436, DOI 10.1111-j.1538-7836.2010.04022.x; Bauersachs R, 2010, NEW ENGL J MED, V363, P2499, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa1007903; Becattini C, 2012, NEW ENGL J MED, V366, P1959, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa1114238; Bochenek T, 2012, THROMB HAEMOSTASIS, V107, P699, DOI 10.1160-TH11-08-0565; Boutitie F, 2011, BRIT MED J, V342, DOI 10.1136-bmj.d3036; Brighton TA, 2012, NEW ENGL J MED, V367, P1979, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa1210384; SUDLOW MF, 1992, LANCET, V340, P873; Campbell I A, 2007, BMJ, V334, P674, DOI 10.1136-bmj.39098.583356.55; Carrier M, 2011, J THROMB HAEMOST, V9, P1119, DOI 10.1111-j.1538-7836.2011.04254.x; Carrier M, 2010, ANN INTERN MED, V152, P578, DOI 10.7326-0003-4819-152-9-201005040-00008; Castellucci LA, 2013, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V347, pf5133; Christiansen SC, 2005, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V293, P2352, DOI 10.1001-jama.293.19.2352; Cosmi B, 2010, THROMB RES, V125, pS62, DOI 10.1016-S0049-3848(10)70016-5; Douketis J, 2011, BRIT MED J, V342, DOI 10.1136-bmj.d813; Douketis J, 2010, ANN INTERN MED, V153, P523, DOI 10.7326-0003-4819-153-8-201010190-00009; Eichinger S, 2010, CIRCULATION, V121, P1630, DOI 10.1161-CIRCULATIONAHA.109.925214; Farge D, 2013, J THROMB HAEMOST, V11, P56, DOI 10.1111-jth.12070; Farraj RS, 2004, SAUDI MED J, V25, P848; Fox BD, 2012, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V7498, P345; Garcia D, 2013, BLOOD, V122, P817, DOI 10.1182-blood-2013-04-496257; Guyatt GH, 2012, CHEST, V141, p53S, DOI 10.1378-chest.11-2288; Hansson PO, 2000, ARCH INTERN MED, V160, P769, DOI 10.1001-archinte.160.6.769; Heit JA, 2000, ARCH INTERN MED, V160, P761, DOI 10.1001-archinte.160.6.761; Hogg K, 2013, JAMA INTERN MED, V173, P1067, DOI 10.1001-jamainternmed.2013.563; Holster IL, 2013, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V145, pe15; Holster IL, 2013, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V145, P105, DOI 10.1053-j.gastro.2013.02.041; Iorio A, 2003, J THROMB HAEMOST, V1, P1906, DOI 10.1046-j.1538-7836.2003.00364.x; Iorio A, 2010, ARCH INTERN MED, V170, P1710, DOI 10.1001-archinternmed.2010.367; Kahn SR, 2010, HEMATOL-AM SOC HEMAT, P216, DOI 10.1182-asheducation-2010.1.216; Kearon C, 2012, CURR OPIN HEMATOL, V19, P363, DOI 10.1097-MOH.0b013e328356745b; Kearon C, 2012, CHEST S, V141, pe419S, DOI DOI 10.1738-CHEST.11-2301; Kearon C, 1999, NEW ENGL J MED, V340, P901, DOI 10.1056-NEJM199903253401201; Kearon C, 2003, NEW ENGL J MED, V349, P631, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa035422; Kearon C, 2012, J THROMB HAEMOST, V10, P507, DOI 10.1111-j.1538-7836.2012.04629.x; Kearon C, 2004, J THROMB HAEMOST, V2, P743, DOI 10.1046-j.1538-7836.2004.00698.x; Lee AYY, 2013, BLOOD, V122, P2310, DOI 10.1182-blood-2013-04-460162; Lefebvre P, 2013, THROMB HAEMOSTASIS, V110, P1288, DOI 10.1160-TH13-05-0425; LEVINE MN, 1995, THROMB HAEMOSTASIS, V74, P606; Lindmarker P, 2000, J INTERN MED, V247, P601, DOI 10.1046-j.1365-2796.2000.00662.x; Locadia M, 2004, THROMB HAEMOSTASIS, V92, P1336, DOI 10.1160-TH04-02-0075; Louzada ML, 2012, CIRCULATION, V126, P448, DOI 10.1161-CIRCULATIONAHA.111.051920; Lyman GH, 2013, J CLIN ONCOL, V31, P2189, DOI 10.1200-JCO.2013.49.1118; MacLean S, 2012, CHEST S, V141, pe1S, DOI DOI 10.1378-CHEST.11-2290; Mcrae S, 2006, LANCET, V368, P371, DOI 10.1016-S0140-6736(06)69110-1; Murin S, 2002, THROMB HAEMOSTASIS, V88, P407; Novacek G, 2010, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V139, P779, DOI 10.1053-j.gastro.2010.05.026; Palareti G, 2006, NEW ENGL J MED, V355, P1780, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa054444; Pinede L, 2001, CIRCULATION, V103, P2453; Poli D, 2013, J THROMB HAEMOST, V11, P1053, DOI 10.1111-jth.12239; Politi MC, 2013, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V347, DOI 10.1136-bmj.f7066; Prandoni P, 2002, BLOOD, V100, P3484, DOI 10.1182-blood-2002-01-0108; Decousus H, 2005, CIRCULATION, V112, P416, DOI 10.1161-CIRCULATIONHA.104.512834; Ridker PM, 2003, NEW ENGL J MED, V348, P1425, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa035029; Rodger MA, 2008, CAN MED ASSOC J, V179, P417, DOI 10.1503-cmaj.080493; Scherz N, 2013, J THROMB HAEMOST, V11, P435, DOI 10.1111-jth.12111; Schulman S, 2013, NEW ENGL J MED, V368, P709, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa1113697; Schulman S, 1997, NEW ENGL J MED, V336, P393, DOI 10.1056-NEJM199702063360601; Schulman S, 2006, J THROMB HAEMOST, V4, P734, DOI 10.1111-j.1538-7836.2006.01795.x; Schulman S, 2003, NEW ENGL J MED, V349, P1713, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa030104; SCHULMAN S, 1995, NEW ENGL J MED, V332, P1661, DOI 10.1056-NEJM199506223322501; Schulman S, 2013, J THROMB HAEMOST, V11, P432, DOI 10.1111-jth.12133; Segal JB, 2009, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V301, P2472, DOI 10.1001-jama.2009.853; Tosetto A, 2012, J THROMB HAEMOST, V10, P1019, DOI 10.1111-j.1538-7836.2012.04735.x; Wells PS, 2003, ARCH INTERN MED, V163, P917, DOI 10.1001-archinte.163.8.917; White RH, 1998, ANN INTERN MED, V128, P73724
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
