MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801962332 · doi:10.1111/hae.13469

Perioperative replacement therapy in haemophilia B: An appeal to “B” more precise

2018· article· en· W2801962332 on OpenAlexaff
H.C.A.M. Hazendonk, Tim Preijers, Ri Liesner, Pratima Chowdary, Daniel P. Hart, David Keeling, M.H.E. Driessens, Britta A. P. Laros‐van Gorkom, F.J.M. van der Meer, Karina Meijer, Karin Fijnvandraat, Frank W.G. Leebeek, Ron A. A. Mathôt, Peter W. Collins, Marjon H. Cnossen

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemophilia · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHaemophilia BPerioperativeHaemophiliaHaemophilia ASurgeryDosingFactor IXBlood transfusionTransfusion therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Haemophilia B is caused by a deficiency of coagulation factor IX (FIX) and characterized by bleeding in muscles and joints. In the perioperative setting, patients are treated with FIX replacement therapy to secure haemostasis. Targeting of specified FIX levels is challenging and requires frequent monitoring and adjustment of therapy. AIM: To evaluate perioperative management in haemophilia B, including monitoring of FIX infusions and observed FIX levels, whereby predictors of low and high FIX levels were assessed. METHODS: undergoing elective, minor or major surgical procedures between 2000 and 2015 were included. Data were collected on patient, surgical and treatment characteristics. Observed FIX levels were compared to target levels as recommended by guidelines. RESULTS: [IQR 0.10-0.39]. Clinically relevant bleeding complications (necessity of a second surgical intervention or red blood cell transfusion) occurred in 7 procedures (2.7%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that targeting of FIX levels in the perioperative setting is complex and suboptimal, but although this bleeding is minimal. Alternative dosing strategies taking patient and surgical characteristics as well as pharmacokinetic principles into account may help to optimize and individualize treatment.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaemophiliaSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207