MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1921219324 · doi:10.1055/s-0037-1612943

The North American Immune Tolerance Registry: Practices, Outcomes, Outcome Predictors

2002· article· en· W1921219324 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barbara L. Kroner, Donna DiMichele

Bibliographic record

VenueThrombosis and Haemostasis · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOutcome (game theory)Immune systemIntensive care medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The North American Immune Tolerance Registry was initiated to study of immune tolerance (ITT) in Canada and the United States with respect to: 1) therapeutic regimens in use for haemophilia A (HA) and B (HB) inhibitor patients; 2) therapeutic outcomes; 3) potential predictors of successful outcome and 4) complications of therapy. Data on 188 ITT courses was collected by questionnaire from 60 haemophilia centers from 1993-99. Among the completed courses, the overall success rate was 70% (115/164) for all HA and 31% (5/16) for all HB. Outcome parameters noted to be predictive of ITT success for all HA were 1) pre-ITT induction (p = 0.003), 2) ITT peak (p = 0.007) and 3) historical pre ITT peak (p = 0.04) inhibitor titres. An inverse correlation between total daily dose (units/kg/day) and success: (80% with under 50; 71% with 50-99; 73% with 100-199; and 41% with > or = 200, p = 0.01) was found. Outcome predictors were not evaluable for HB, although adverse reactions to therapy, including nephrotic syndrome, and access complications were more common among failed courses. Infection most often complicated the use of access catheters. These results are discussed within the context of the international ITT registry and upcoming prospective ITT study.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations274
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThrombosis and HaemostasisSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207