From Principle to Practice: Bridging the Gap in Patient Profiling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The standard clinical coagulation assays, activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and prothrombin time (PT) cannot predict thrombotic or bleeding risk. Since thrombin generation is central to haemorrhage control and when unregulated, is the likely cause of thrombosis, thrombin generation assays (TGA) have gained acceptance as "global assays" of haemostasis. These assays generate an enormous amount of data including four key thrombin parameters (lag time, maximum rate, peak and total thrombin) that may change to varying degrees over time in longitudinal studies. Currently, each thrombin parameter is averaged and presented individually in a table, bar graph or box plot; no method exists to visualize comprehensive thrombin generation data over time. To address this need, we have created a method that visualizes all four thrombin parameters simultaneously and can be animated to evaluate how thrombin generation changes over time. This method uses all thrombin parameters to intrinsically rank individuals based on their haemostatic status. The thrombin generation parameters can be derived empirically using TGA or simulated using computational models (CM). To establish the utility and diverse applicability of our method we demonstrate how warfarin therapy (CM), factor VIII prophylaxis for haemophilia A (CM), and pregnancy (TGA) affects thrombin generation over time. The method is especially suited to evaluate an individual's thrombotic and bleeding risk during "normal" processes (e.g pregnancy or aging) or during therapeutic challenges to the haemostatic system. Ultimately, our method is designed to visualize individualized patient profiles which are becoming evermore important as personalized medicine strategies become routine clinical practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".