Recent developments in clinimetric instruments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assessment of impairment and function is essential in order to monitor joint status and evaluate therapeutic interventions in patients with haemophilia. The improvements in the treatment of haemophilia have required the development of more sensitive tools to detect the more minor dysfunctions that may now be apparent. This paper outlines some of the recent developments in this field. The Haemophilia Joint Health Score (HJHS) provides a systematic and robust measure of joint impairment. The MRI Scoring System has been designed to provide a comprehensive scoring system combining both progressive and additive scales. The Functional Independence Score for Haemophilia (FISH) has been developed to assess performance of functional activities and can be used in conjunction with the Haemophilia Activities List (HAL) which provides a self report measure of function. It is recommended that both measures are evaluated as these tools measure different constructs. Further refinement and testing of the psychometric properties of all of these tools is in progress. More widespread use of these tools will enable the sharing of data across the world so promoting best practice and ultimately enhancing patient care.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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".