MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessing thrombocytopenia in the intensive care unit: the past, present, and future

2017· review· en· W2777185046 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHematology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicinePlatelet transfusionContext (archaeology)Intensive care unitDecompensationPlateletPediatricsImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thrombocytopenia is common among patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Multiple pathophysiological mechanisms may contribute, including thrombin-mediated platelet activation, dilution, hemophagocytosis, extracellular histones, ADAMTS13 deficiency, and complement activation. From the clinical perspective, the development of thrombocytopenia in the ICU usually indicates serious organ system derangement and physiologic decompensation rather than a primary hematologic disorder. Thrombocytopenia is associated with bleeding, transfusion, and adverse clinical outcomes including death, though few deaths are directly attributable to bleeding. The assessment of thrombocytopenia begins by looking back to the patient's medical history and presenting illness. This past information, combined with careful observation of the platelet trajectory in the context of the patient's clinical course, offers clues to the diagnosis and prognosis. Management is primarily directed at the underlying disorder and transfusion of platelets to prevent or treat clinical bleeding. Optimal platelet transfusion strategies are not defined, and a conservative approach is recommended.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.296 · 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