MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799781194 · doi:10.1016/s2352-3026(18)30048-6

Tailored frequency-escalated primary prophylaxis for severe haemophilia A: results of the 16-year Canadian Hemophilia Prophylaxis Study longitudinal cohort

2018· article· en· W2799781194 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brian M. Feldman, Georges E. Rivard, Paul Babyn, John K. Wu, MacGregor Steele, Man‐Chiu Poon, Robert Card, Sara J. Israels, Nicole Laferriere, Kulwant Gill, Anthony K.C. Chan, Manuel Carção, Robert J. Klaassen, Stéphanie Cloutier, Victoria Price, Saunya Dover, Victor S. Blanchette

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Haematology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioMcMaster Children's HospitalMcMaster UniversityLaurentian UniversityThunder Bay Regional Health Sciences CentreHôpital de l'Enfant-JésusUniversity of ManitobaIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreAlberta Children's HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of SaskatchewanDalhousie UniversityBritish Columbia Children's HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustinePublic Health OntarioUniversity of OttawaInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationUniversity of Toronto
FundersBaxaltaMedical Research Council CanadaCSL Behring
KeywordsMedicineHaemophiliaClotting factorHaemophilia AHemarthrosisCohortPediatricsClinical endpointPhysical therapyClinical trialSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet HaematologySame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207