Von Willebrand Disease and Pregnancy: A Review of Evidence and Expert Opinion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
von Willebrand disease (VWD) is a common, inherited bleeding disorder. There are three main types of VWD, which result in a quantitative or qualitative deficiency in von Willebrand factor (VWF) and in severe cases, also Factor VIII (FVIII). The severity of bleeding depends on the underlying pathophysiology. Type 1 VWD is usually mild, while types 2 or 3 VWD can be associated with moderate or significant bleeding. Managing pregnant women with VWD requires a multidisciplinary approach. Such patients are at increased risk of postpartum hemorrhage. Whether women with VWD are at increased risk of spontaneous abortion remains unclear. Because of increased risk of bleeding, there are special considerations for delivery and obstetrical analgesia. There is a lack of high-quality evidence supporting monitoring and treatment of VWD in pregnancy. Most experts recommend that FVIII and VWF levels be monitored prior to delivery and treatment initiated when levels remain below 0.50 IU/mL. Some experts consider desmopressin (DDAVP) to be the preferred initial treatment in type 1 and most type 2 VWD. DDAVP is relatively contraindicated in type 2B disease. Plasma-derived FVIII and VWF replacements are the treatment of choice in type 2B and 3 VWD and in type 1 or 2 VWD when patients do not respond to DDAVP.
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) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".