Circumcision in boys with mild Hemophilia A – the Yogyakarta experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background In boys with hemophilia, there is a risk ofhemorrhage resulting from circumcision. There has been nostandardised management in Indonesia. We report our experiencewith 4 hemophiliac boys who underwent circumcision at Dr.Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta, in south-central Java.Objective To develop a safe, practical and accessible method toprevent bleeding in boys with hemophilia undergoing circumcisionin Indonesia.Methods Written informed consent was obtained from parentsrequesting the procedure. All boys had mild Hemophilia A (VIII:C level >7.8 U/ml) diagnosed at a median age of 4.4 years (range0.75–9 years). Median age at time of circumcision was 7.5 years(range 0.8–12 years).Results There were no intraoperative or post-circumcisionbleeding problem encountered in any of the patients, who weredischarged from hospital three days post-surgery. On follow upeight days and 12 days post-circumcision, they remained free ofcomplications.Conclusion Circumcision can be safely performed in boys withmild Hemophilia A following adequate pre-operative planningand prophylactic therapy. A standardised protocol for theYogyakarta Bleeding Disorders Program. evolving from thisexperience, is being planned.
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".