The expert in hemostasis and thrombosis in the Italian health system: role and requirements for a specific clinical and laboratory expertise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hemorrhagic and thrombotic diseases are highly heterogeneous disorders that may affect a large proportion of the population, as in the case of patients taking antithrombotic drugs. The appropriate management of such conditions requires the availability of specific diagnostic assays, together with knowledge of the possible clinical syndromes and of their appropriate treatment. This can only be achieved through second-level specialized laboratories supervised by trained personnel. Such diagnostic and therapeutic organization is not widely available in Italy except in a very limited number of those large hospitals that are centers of excellence on a national scale. Increasing the availability of such resources would be of great benefit to patients, and could also be cost-effective for the national healthcare system. This document is promoted by the Italian Society for the Study on Hemostasis and Thrombosis (SISET) and by the main Italian scientific societies involved in the field during the years 2011-2012. It aims to identify the level of scientific and professional training required to define a physician as a Hemostasis and Thrombosis Expert, graded according to the levels of skill required for different clinical settings.
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 | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.005 |
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".