Increased burden on caregivers of having a child with haemophilia complicated by inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Having a child with a chronic disease often increases the burden in the family with more hospital visits, treatment administration, and increased worries for the ill child. A cross-sectional, international, multi-centre study in caregivers of children <18 years with haemophilia and inhibitor was performed at Haemophilia Treatment Centres in Sweden, UK, and Canada to evaluate caregivers' burden and their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) compared to that of caregivers of children on prophylaxis without inhibitors and caregivers of healthy children. METHODS: Caregivers of children with haemophilia completed several questionnaires (SF-36, Visual Analogue Scale of Interference (VAS), Caregivers' Burden Scale and Impact on Family Scale (IOF). Caregivers of healthy children completed only the SF-36. In addition, socio-demographic data were collected. RESULTS: In total, 143 caregivers were included in the study. Comparing the two haemophilia groups with caregivers of healthy children revealed significant differences for all SF-34 domains except 'pain' and 'general health'. In Caregivers' Burden Scale, caregivers of children with inhibitors reported higher impact of haemophilia (P < 0.0001) and higher impact on VAS (P < 0.0001) compared to caregivers of children without inhibitors. In IOF, caregivers of children with inhibitors reported significant negative impact of the disease, except for aspect of coping. CONCLUSION: Caregivers of children with inhibitors reported higher impact of the disease compared to caregivers of children with no inhibitors. No differences between mothers and fathers in the two groups for SF-36, Caregivers' Burden Scale, VAS and IOF, except for domain pain in SF-36 where mothers reported higher impairments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".