MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942269490 · doi:10.1111/hae.13754

From the voices of people with haemophilia A and their caregivers: Challenges with current treatment, their impact on quality of life and desired improvements in future therapies

2019· article· en· W2942269490 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ryan E. Wiley, Charles P. Khoury, Adrian W.K. Snihur, Marni Williams, David Page, Nicole Graham, Lori Laudenbach, Cindy Milne‐Wren, Jayson Stoffman

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemophilia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences NorthLondon Health Sciences CentreCanadian Hemophilia Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaemophiliaMedicinePsychosocialQuality of life (healthcare)DiseaseValue (mathematics)PsychiatryNursingPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Haemophilia A is a chronic disease requiring frequent intravenous infusions of recombinant factor VIII. Previous studies have shown that challenges associated with current treatments may have significant impacts on quality of life (QoL) that are as important as the health outcomes conferred by the therapy. Emerging therapeutic innovations offer the potential to mitigate treatment-related challenges, and it is therefore important to develop a better understanding of patient and caregiver experiences with existing haemophilia A treatments in order to characterize the full value of new treatments. AIM: To gather firsthand perspectives from people with haemophilia A (PWHA) and caregivers on the challenges with current treatment, their impact on QoL and desired improvements in future therapies. METHODS: Qualitative insights were gathered from 20 non-inhibitor PWHA or caregivers of PWHA across Canada through one-on-one interviews; insights were further explored through focus group sessions to uncover overarching themes and prioritize issues with current treatments. RESULTS: PWHA and caregivers identified several challenges, including administration of intravenous infusions, coordination of treatment schedules and ensuring adequate medication and supplies. Participants described how these challenges impact psychosocial well-being, physical health, personal/social life and work. Alternate modes of administration and longer-lasting treatment effects were identified as desired improvements over current treatments. CONCLUSION: This study emphasizes the impact that existing haemophilia A treatments have on psychological well-being, employment opportunities and adherence to treatment regimens. These considerations may help to inform decision-making for policymakers and health systems around the true value of new therapies entering the haemophilia market.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations57
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaemophiliaSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207