MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Musculoskeletal problems in persons with inhibitors: How do we treat?

2012· review· en· W1561463653 on OpenAlexaff
Horacio Caviglia, Pradeep Narayan, Angela Forsyth, P. L. F. Giangrande, Mileka Gilbert, N J Goddard, Kathy Mulder, Sadia Binte Rahim

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemophilia · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Physiotherapy Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inhibitors are a serious complication, considerably increasing the morbidity, mortality and cost of treatment in this patient group. The challenge of treating people with haemophilia (PWH) with inhibitors can be met by a well-coordinated multidisciplinary team specialized in haemophilia. Each treatment centre must run a screening programme to detect inhibitors within their population and develop protocols to treat these patients. The treatment centre in Buenos Aires developed a screening programme that tests all our patients twice a year, ensuring early detection of inhibitors and early treatment of complications. In 2006, we analysed the quality of life (QOL) of non-inhibitor patients and compared it with inhibitor patients detected by this programme and found no differences in QOL measured by the SF36 questionnaire and no differences in school absenteeism. When diagnosis of the inhibitor does not come from a screening programme, its presence is suspected upon a lack of response to conventional replacement therapy for musculoskeletal bleeding, losing the 'golden moment' of treatment. This complication is much more serious when facing a traumatic bleed. In this situation, the lack of early diagnosis can lead to permanent damage or even death. Due to the cost of bypassing factors and the lack of experience of the medical team in the treatment of patients with inhibitors, many treatments that would improve the QOL of patients are instituted in an insufficient manner. Therefore, patients with haemophilia and inhibitors are often untreated or undertreated in their community. Orthopaedic surgeons and physiotherapists play a key role in the treatment of these patients and should be included in therapeutic decision making and most specifically in the postoperative treatment of patients with haemophilia and inhibitors. It is important that these patients have quick access to a trained therapeutic team in order to obtain an early diagnosis and treatment plan to prevent the evolution of the pathological process. Early treatment is cost-effective in maintaining and improving the QOL of patients. Experience in patients with haemophilia and inhibitors is not very extensive. Today, this situation is changing, with several treatment centres beginning to perform surgeries in these most complex patients, giving them a chance to improve their QOL. This article presents the experience of experts from various fields involved in treating patients with inhibitors from a developed and developing world perspective.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaemophiliaSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207