Notice bibliographique
Résumé
For 50 years, the World Federation of Hemophilia (WFH) has been working globally to close the gap in care and to achieve Treatment for All patients, men and women, with haemophilia and other inherited bleeding disorders, regardless of where they might live. The WFH estimates that more than one in 1000 men and women has a bleeding disorder equating to 6,900,000 worldwide. To close the gap in care between developed and developing nations a continued focus on the successful strategies deployed heretofore will be required. However, in response to the rapid advances in treatment and emerging therapeutic advances on the horizon it will also require fresh approaches and renewed strategic thinking. It is difficult to predict what each therapeutic advance on the horizon will mean for the future, but there is no doubt that we are in a golden age of research and development, which has the prospect of revolutionizing treatment once again. An improved understanding of "optimal" treatment is fundamental to the continued evolution of global care. The challenges of answering government and payer demands for evidence-based medicine, and cost justification for the introduction and enhancement of treatment, are ever-present and growing. To sustain and improve care it is critical to build the body of outcome data for individual patients, within haemophilia treatment centers (HTCs), nationally, regionally and globally. Emerging therapeutic advances (longer half-life therapies and gene transfer) should not be justified or brought to market based only on the notion that they will be economically more affordable, although that may be the case, but rather more importantly that they will be therapeutically more advantageous. Improvements in treatment adherence, reductions in bleeding frequency (including microhemorrhages), better management of trough levels, and improved health outcomes (including quality of life) should be the foremost considerations. As part of a new WFH strategic plan (2012-2014) the WFH has identified several key initiatives for particular emphasis - continuation of the Global Alliance for Progress (GAP) program, a new initiative to address underserved countries and regions (The Cornerstone Initiative), enhancing health outcomes research and analysis, and a new research mentorship program. Despite our progress to date in closing the global gap in care, our work is not complete. Too many patients remain undiagnosed and too few receive adequate treatment. This paper will also discuss historical, present and future challenges and opportunities to close the gap in care and achieve Treatment for All.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».