A study of reported factor VIII use around the world
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Replacement therapy has significantly improved the life expectancy and lifestyle of people with haemophilia. The objectives of this article were to study the reported factor IX (FIX) use on a country-by-country basis and address the following question: Does the reported FIX use vary by national economies? We obtained data on the reported number of international units (IUs) of FIX used for 90 countries from the Marketing Research Bureau and the World Federation of Hemophilia. Results show that the reported FIX use varies considerably across national economies, even among the wealthiest of countries.Trends suggest that the reported FIX usage increases with increasing economic capacity and has been increasing over time. Trends also suggest that consumption of FIX has been increasing at a greater rate in high income countries. Given these trends, there will likely be an overall increase in the amount of FIX concentrates used in the treatment of haemophilia B. We also found that FIX use both in terms of IUs per capita and IUs per person provide a complete picture of the level of haemophilia care within a country. Such information is critical for planning efforts of national healthcare agencies to determine realistic budget priorities and pharmaceutical manufacturers to determine adequate production levels of FIX concentrates. By improving the data collection and surveillance of FIX use for the treatment of people with haemophilia B, we can identify trends and needs of patients and highlight best treatment practices among countries.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".