MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Chemical synovectomy in haemophilia: status and challenges

2001· article· en· W2118517435 on OpenAlexaff
Georges‐Étienne Rivard

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemophilia · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynovectomyMedicineHaemophiliaSynovitisYttriumRange of motionSurgeryInternal medicineArthritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemical synovectomy has been used for the last three decades as an alternative for surgical synovectomy in the treatment of chronic haemophilic synovitis. Comparable results have been obtained with the many different radionuclides used: decreased bleeding, decreased pain and stable range of motion, in more than 50% of treated patients. Yttrium 90Y and Phosphorus 32P seem to be the isotopes of choice. Osmic acid and rifampicine have been used in a relatively small number of subjects. Global result of treatment with these two pro-ducts seems to be less favourable than with radionuclides. Late effects of chemical synovectomy are not known.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaemophiliaSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207