Hospitalization of children with acute immune thrombocytopenic purpura – is it necessary?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify a target group of children with acute immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) that may not require hospitalization for management. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted of all children admitted over a two-year period to a tertiary care paediatric hospital with the diagnosis of acute ITP. Patients were classified according to typical and atypical presentations. Typical patients were defined as those aged between one and 10 years, with no hepatomegaly or significant splenomegaly and who had typical laboratory features for ITP. Patients who did not meet these criteria were categorized as atypical. Outcome measures included length of stay (LOS) in hospital; frequency of bone marrow aspiration (BMA); type of treatment; incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) or severe bleeding; and admission and discharge platelet counts. RESULTS: There were 74 patients hospitalized for a mean of 3.6 days. No patients suffered an ICH or bleeding requiring transfusion. Patients with typical presentations (42) were compared with patients with atypical presentations (32) and were not significantly different for clinically important outcomes such as admission and discharge platelet counts, serious complications or type of therapy. Typical patients had significantly fewer BMAs than did atypical patients - 22 of 42 (52%) versus 25 of 32 (78%) (P=0.02), and a shorter LOS - 3.1 (+/-0.9) days versus 4.2 (+/-1.8) days (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Children presenting with ITP have a low incidence of bleeding complications and many of these patients can be managed as outpatients. A multicentre study is needed to properly delineate a low risk group suited for outpatient medical management.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".