Natural Health Product Utilization in Warfarinized Children; Prevalence and Knowledge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The need for long-term thromboprophylaxis in children using warfarin therapy is increasing. Natural health products (NHPs) are administered to children by parents who perceive them to be useful and acceptable adjuncts or alternatives to conventional therapies. Interactions of NHPs with prescribed therapies may result in serious adverse events. NHP usage is underevaluated in children and there are no studies evaluating NHP usage in warfarinized children. Objectives: To explore NHP use in warfarinized children and their siblings to determine the prevalence, varieties, and reasons for NHP usage, as well as the potential effect on warfarinization (eg, time in therapeutic range [TTR]). Methods: This is a 3-phase cross-sectional cohort study that includes the (1) prevalence (2) NHP education and knowledge assessment, and (3) the follow-up NHP utilization phase. Results: Forty-six percent of warfarinized children consumed NHPs, with time in therapeutic range of 74%. The mean score for baseline knowledge of NHPs and warfarin following the education phase was 67%. Follow-up NHP use was 30%, and increased consistency of utilization with TTR was 83% (p < 0.05), consistent with education provided. Conclusions: The consistent prevalence rates over time of NHP usage in warfarinized children indicate the need for future studies. Education remains vital to combat the potential risks of NHP-warfarin interaction, encouraging patient disclosure and consistency.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".