MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085306100 · doi:10.2174/157339609789007213

Diagnosis of Von Willebrand Disease in Children

2009· article· en· W2085306100 on OpenAlexaff
Nupur Mittal, Paula James, Leonard A. Valentino

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Pediatric Reviews · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVon Willebrand diseaseMedicineVon Willebrand factorFamily historyPopulationDiseaseMucocutaneous zonePediatricsBleeding timeDermatologyPlateletImmunologyInternal medicinePlatelet aggregation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is an inherited bleeding disorder that is caused by deficiency or dysfunction of Von Willebrand factor, a plasma protein that mediates the initial adhesion of platelets at sites of vascular injury and also binds and stabilizes blood clotting factor VIII in the circulation. VWD prevalence has been estimated in several countries on the basis of the number of symptomatic patients seen at haemostasis centers, and the values range from roughly 23 to 110 per million population. VWD is characterized by three key features: a personal history of excessive mucocutaneous bleeding, abnormal VWF laboratory studies, and evidence of a family history of the condition. Although bruising and epistaxis are common among children who have VWD, these symptoms also are reported in normal children. The accurate assessment of hemorrhagic symptoms is a key component in diagnosing VWD but this can present a significant challenge, particularly in the pediatric population. The challenges involved in making the diagnosis of Von Willebrand disease - focusing on personal bleeding history and the utility of bleeding questionnaires, along with family bleeding history and laboratory diagnosis in the pediatric population - will be reviewed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Pediatric ReviewsSame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207