MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Haemophilia in the first years of life

2008· article· en· W2056304353 on OpenAlexaff
Rolf Ljung, Hérvè Chambost, A. M. Stain, D. DiMichele

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemophilia · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsMedicineHaemophiliaPediatricsComplicationHaemophilia APopulationIntracranial haemorrhageThrombosisQuality of life (healthcare)Intensive care medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surgery in infants and young children with haemophilia, when preceded by accurate diagnosis and accompanied by safe and effective factor prophylaxis, is not associated with a significant risk of haemorrhage. Haemophilic newborns undergoing circumcision or major surgery prior to diagnosis and in the absence of appropriate haemostatic prophylaxis remain as a concern. Inhibitor development has replaced haemorrhage as the major surgical complication in the developed world, largely because of the intensity of treatment used to secure haemostasis. For that reason only, essential surgery should be performed. Intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) during the neonatal period affects 3.5-4.0% of all haemophilia boys in countries with a good standard of health care, which is considerably (40-80 times) higher than expected in the normal population. Because of the high frequency of sporadic cases, ICH in the neonatal period can only be partially prevented by improved carrier diagnosis and counselling. Infections and thrombosis are the major serious complications of central venous lines. Large differences are seen in the frequency of these complications, the most plausible explanations are probably related to the protocol used for device care, the quality of education and the compliance of the users, an issue addressed in an on-going 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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.243 · 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.

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

Citations36
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaemophiliaSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207