Coagulopathy in Children With Liver Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It was thought that a high international normalized ratio predicted bleeding in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) and patients were "autoanticoagulated." Contrary to this belief, while patients with CLD experienced bleeding, they also developed thromboses. In the last decade, the prevailing literature challenged the idea that an elevated international normalized ratio increased bleeding risk. The global assays of coagulation such as thromboelastography (TEG)/rotational thromboelastometry and thrombin generation assays provide additional insight into coagulation processes. It has become apparent that a parallel reduction of procoagulant and anticoagulant factors leave patients in a new "balanced" state, albeit a fragile one, where the balance can be easily disrupted. The inherent differences in coagulation between children and adults such as differences in levels of procoagulant and anticoagulant factors, underlying liver disease, and the paucity of studies in children make extrapolation of these findings to the pediatric population problematic. Ultimately, this is an area that requires further investigation to avoid inappropriate use of blood products and medication.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".