MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332510203 · doi:10.1097/mbc.0000000000000158

Desmopressin responsiveness at a capped dose of 15 μg in type 1 von Willebrand disease and mild hemophilia A

2014· article· en· W2332510203 on OpenAlexaff
Dou-Anne Siew, Joy Mangel, Lori Laudenbach, Sheila Schembri, Leonard Minuk

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Coagulation & Fibrinolysis · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDesmopressinMedicineVon Willebrand factorVon Willebrand diseaseCoagulopathyInternal medicineGastroenterologyRetrospective cohort studyEndocrinologyPlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Desmopressin (DDAVP) is commonly used in the treatment of patients with type 1 von Willebrand disease (VWD) and mild hemophilia A. A patient's responsiveness to DDAVP based on a 0.3 μg/kg dose determines future therapeutic efficacy of the drug. The aim of the study was to determine whether a capped dose of 15 μg subcutaneous DDAVP is able to achieve the same level of DDAVP responsiveness as previously reported. This is a retrospective chart review of patients from 1995 to 2013 in adults and children with type 1 VWD and hemophilia A weighing more than 50 kg. Levels of factor VIII, ristocetin cofactor, and von Willebrand factor antigen were measured before and after 1 h of administration of 15 μg of DDAVP. In patients with type 1 VWD, the complete response rate was 82.5% with a partial response rate of 12.5% and 5% nonresponders. In patients with mild hemophilia A, the complete response rate was 53.8% with a partial response rate of 38.5% and 7.7% nonresponders. These results using a capped 15-μg dose of DDAVP are similar to previously published reports using the 0.3-μg/kg dose.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations28
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood Coagulation & FibrinolysisSame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207