Screening for Hemochromatosis and Iron Overload: Satisfaction with Results Notification and Understanding of Mailed Results in Unaffected Participants of the HEIRS Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The purpose of this study was to assess the level of satisfaction and understanding of test results, by a sample of non-C282Y homozygous participants in the hemochromatosis and iron overload screening (HEIRS) study, who received serum ferritin (SF), transferrin saturation (TS), and HFE gene test results by mail. METHODS: Approximately 1 month after receiving test results by mail, participants were surveyed about understanding of and satisfaction with results notification. RESULTS: Overall, participants were satisfied with receiving test results by mail. Participants receiving results with one or two HFE mutations or TS and/or SF levels outside the normal range (an "alert value") were less likely to be satisfied with this method of notification. Participants with normal HFE test results understood their results and recommendations better than those with one or two mutations. Although all participants received results letters in their native language, English-speaking participants had higher mean understanding scores than Mandarin, Vietnamese, or Spanish-speaking participants. CONCLUSION: Participants were satisfied with receiving test results by mail. However, the level of understanding of the results was not sufficient for this mode of results notification to stand alone, especially for non-English speaking participants, and all participants with one or more test results outside the normal range.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it