MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2225149352

Intravenous immune globulin use in Canada.

2003· article· en· W2225149352 on OpenAlexaffabout
Melanie Poulin-Costello, Mark D. Preston, Neil Maresky

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsBayer (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpecialtyBlood productPediatricsBlood bankEmergency medicineFamily medicineSurgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the amount of intravenous immune globulin (IVIG) used across indications in Canada and which Canadian medical specialties prescribe IVIG. To assess the proportion of IVIG that was used in appropriate off-label and labelled indications versus those deemed to be inappropriate off-label indications. METHODS: In Canada, all IVIG is distributed by the Canadian Blood System to Canadian blood banks within the hospital setting. Hospital blood banks then dispense IVIG to individual patients as it is prescribed and, as such, many institutions maintain a comprehensive database inventory on IVIG use. This study is a retrospective review of IVIG use as obtained from 10 teaching and community hospital blood bank databases in Ontario, Quebec, Alberta and British Columbia. Two of these 10 institutions were pediatric teaching hospitals whereas the remaining eight centres were adult care sites. Product usage was assessed between 1997 and 1999 in adult care sites, and 1997 and 1998 in the pediatric hospitals. The information collected included the number of grams of IVIG dispensed, the indications, the prescribing physician's specialty and the number of patients treated for a given indication, all assessed on an annual basis. A separate analysis was performed to determine the appropriateness of IVIG use where appropriateness was based on the published 1997 and 1999 Canadian Consensus Guidelines for IVIG use. RESULTS: IVIG was prescribed for 90 different indications, six of which are licensed in Canada. When considered as separate populations, adult and pediatric use accounted for 61 and 65 different indications, respectively. Licensed use for all known indications represented approximately 47% and 62% in adult and pediatric settings, respectively. Twenty-nine per cent of IVIG use in adult and 17% in pediatric settings was not reported and is therefore unknown. Although off-label use by definition is approximately 53% in adults and 38% in pediatrics, the majority of overall IVIG use (89% in both populations) is considered appropriate by guideline definition. Hematologists and neurologists were the most prevalent prescribers of IVIG. CONCLUSIONS: Based on guideline definition, appropriate off-label use of IVIG is very high in Canada.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.178 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations31
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207