The Prevalence of von Willebrand Disease in the Primary Care Setting.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Von Willebrand Disease (VWD), the most common inherited bleeding disorder in humans, results from a deficiency or abnormal functioning of von Willebrand factor (VWF). The most widely accepted estimate of VWD prevalence in the literature is 1%, which is derived from epidemiological studies performed in the USA and Italy. However, both of these studies were based on investigations of healthy, school aged children without overt bleeding symptoms. In contrast, the prevalence of symptomatic VWD has been estimated to be approximately 1 in 10,000 based on patients referred to specialized bleeding clinics. The discrepancy between these prevalence figures has not been explained and requires further investigation. This uncertainty is further complicated by a lack of consensus concerning the frequency of bleeding symptoms in the normal population. VWD can cause a range of symptoms from mild bruising to significant mucocutaneous bleeding. Such symptoms are often presented to primary care physicians by their patients but are not always significant enough to prompt a referral to a specialist. Thus, the primary care setting provides a unique context for assessing the prevalence of symptomatic VWD. The objective of the present study is to perform a prospective assessment of the prevalence of symptomatic VWD in the primary care setting. The on-going study has been carried out since September 2004 in four primary care clinics in the Kingston, Ontario area. Patients of all ages were approached in the waiting rooms of the clinics and asked if they had ever experienced problems with bleeding or bruising. Those that were significantly concerned by their symptoms and not aware of the cause of their bruising or bleeding (e.g. oral anticoagulant therapy) were then eligible to complete a detailed standardized bleeding questionnaire adapted from that used in the recent European multicenter type 1 VWD study (MCMDM-1VWD). The questionnaires were scored in terms of the severity and frequency of the following symptoms: epistaxis, bruising, oral cavity bleeding, post-dental extraction bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, post-operative bleeding, menorrhagia, post-partum hemorrhaging, hemarthrosis and central nervous system bleeding. Subjects with a positive score of five or greater on the questionnaire were then sent for VWD laboratory studies on two separate occasions, at least 4–6 weeks apart. To date, 5,000 patients have been approached and asked if they have ever experienced problems with bruising or bleeding. Of those, approximately 11% reported problems with bruising or bleeding, a number significantly lower than the 25% reported in the literature. Only 104 patients reported significant symptoms and 45 people went on to complete the bleeding questionnaire. Approximately 53% of the subjects had a positive bleeding score leading to laboratory investigations for VWD. Of the subjects that have had blood work performed, we have made a new diagnosis of type I VWD in one individual. As well, three patients approached at the clinics had been previously diagnosed with VWD. Therefore, the prevalence of symptomatic VWD in the primary care setting evaluated thus far in this study is 0.08%.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».