MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risks and benefits of sports and fitness activities for people with haemophilia

2004· review· en· W2044734221 on OpenAlexaff
Kathy Mulder, F. Cassis, D. R. A. Seuser, Prakash Narayan, R. Dalzell, Wendy Poulsen

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemophilia · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaemophiliaMedicineFeelingEmotional stressPhysical activityPhysical therapyPsychologySocial psychologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Physical activity is a key component of a healthy lifestyle. Exercise and physical activity have been shown to help maintain a healthy body weight, reduce stress, increase self-esteem and feelings of wellbeing, control blood pressure, and prevent heart disease and diabetes. Children with haemophilia may feel restricted from competing in sports through parental concern or pain and difficulty in moving, or they may rebel against such restrictions, thus leaving themselves open to serious injury. Several groups have attempted to classify sports activities with regard to the level of risk involved; however, these are not consistent. It is important to match the child's abilities with the sport in which they want to take part, and suggest alternatives if this is not possible. Prevention of injury should not depend solely on use of factor concentrates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations63
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaemophiliaSame topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207