Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rationale: Hemophilias are hereditary bleeding disorders usually presenting with muscloskeletal bleeding (for example, hemarthroses, synovitis and hematomas). Recently it has been suggested that patients with hemophilia are at increased risk of osteoporosis. The arthropathy associated with hemophilia, along with the treatments for human immune defeciency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) may predispose affected individuals to osteoporosis and pathologic fractures. Methods: This was a retrospective study that included unselected male patients aged 18 yrs old and over with severe hemophilia managed and followed in the Hamilton-Niagara Regional Hemophilia Program. All patients have been recommended to have bone mineral density studies (BMD). BMD was performed using dual x ray absorptiometry. Results: There were 19 patients, mean age 29 years, range 18–43. Prophylactic treatment with recombinant factors was received by 12/19 patients (63%); HCV infection was present in 14/19 (73%) and HIV in 6/19 (31%) patients, the latter all receiving HAART treatment. A reduced BMD (osteopenia) as defined by the World Health Organization was detected in 42% of patients (5/13 or 38% of Hemophilia A and 3/6 or 50% of Hemophilia B participants). Among those who received prophylactic recombinant factors, 5/12 had reduced BMD. There was a trend towards decreased BMD in patients with HIV or HCV. Conclusions: Individuals with severe hemophilia are at increased risk of having low bone mineral density. Those with coexistent HIV and HCV infections may be at higher risk. There was no clear correlation in this small series between BMD and age, and the use of prophylactic factor concentrate. Further study is required to obtain a more precise prevalence of disease, and clarification of the risk factors; however, a high prevalence of osteopenia in such a young cohort of individuals is concerning and estimation of BMD in all individuals with severe hemophilia is advised.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".