MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129098413 · doi:10.1055/s-0037-1619794

Haemophilia Registry of the Medical Committee of the Swiss Haemophilia Society

2013· article· en· W2129098413 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicolas von der Weid

Bibliographic record

VenueHämostaseologie · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaemophiliaHaemophilia AMedicinePatient registryFamily medicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The Haemophilia Registry of the Swiss Haemophilia Society is currently more than 12 years old. We present here the data as from October 31st, 2012. Registered are patients with haemophilia A and B, von Willebrand disease with VWF : R-Co < 10% and other rare factor deficiencies. For this latter group, inclusion in the Registry depends on the clinical relevance of the bleeding disorder, not on the factor level. Data come directly from the Swiss haemophilia reference and treatment centers and should be updated once a year. Currently 967 patients are registered, the majority (587) presenting with haemophilia A. Disease severity is graded according to ISTH criteria. Basic epidemiological findings are similar to those from larger registries in Europe, Canada or the USA. More that 60% of persons with haemophilia in Switzerland are treated on-demand, with the exception of young patients (<20 years) who present an 80 to 90% rate of prophylactic therapy. Nevertheless, global use of factor concentrates went continuously up over the last decade and reaches now 5.52 Units per capita, still a low value compared to other high-income European countries. A recent survey of the Registry shows that treaters’ compliance with yearly data updates is insufficient; measures will be undertaken in 2013 to enhance data quality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHämostaseologieSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207