Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development of an inhibitor against factor VIII (FVIII) is an important complication of haemophilia. It occurs in approximately 25-30% of patients with haemophilia A [1]. FVIII inhibitors may also occur as autoantibodies. The latter occur in non-haemophiliacs and, although rare (occurring in approximately one per million of the population), are frequently associated with life-threatening bleeding. Inhibitors are considered low level if they are < 5 Bethesda Units (BU) or high level if they are > 10 BU. The former usually remain low and rarely give anamnestic response, the latter do so frequently. Despite various approaches to their management, the presence of inhibitors remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality. The effectiveness of porcine FVIII (pFVIII) in treating patients with both auto- and alloantibodies to FVIII has been well demonstrated when adequate circulating levels of FVIII are obtained [2--10]. However, pFVIII therapy may give rise to antibodies to the pFVIII and the utility of this treatment in the presence of high levels of porcine antibody is less well recognized and understood. Nonetheless, pFVIII under these circumstances may be useful in a select group of patients where management is difficult.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".