Use of ultrasound for assessment of musculoskeletal disease in persons with haemophilia: Results of an International Prophylaxis Study Group global survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The objective of this survey was to understand the global trends of imaging assessments in persons with haemophilia, focusing on point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). Insights into the barriers impeding its widespread proliferation as a frontline imaging modality were obtained. METHODS: The survey opened in September of 2017 and closed in May of 2018. Haemophilia Treatment Centres (HTCs) treating both paediatric/adult patients were the population of interest. A REDCap survey of 25 questions was disseminated to 232 clinical staff in 26 countries. RESULTS: The majority of respondents (88.3%, 91/103) reported that POCUS is most useful to confirm or rule out a presumed acute joint bleed. European HTCs reported the highest routine use of POCUS at 59.5% (22/37) followed by HTCs in the "Other" countries of the world at 46.7% (7/15) and North American HTCs at 43.9% (25/57). At the time of the survey, physiotherapists were identified as the clinical staff who perform POCUS 52.8% (28/53) of the time, in contrast with nurses/nurse practitioners who represent only 5.7% (3/53) of users. The greatest perceived barriers to the implementation of POCUS are the lack of trained healthcare professionals who can perform POCUS at 69.2% (74/107) and the overall time commitment required at 68.2% (73/107). CONCLUSION: Despite POCUS being used in 49.5% (54/109) of sampled HTCs, it is still utilized almost 30% less globally than full diagnostic ultrasound. A list of barriers has been identified to inform HTCs which challenges they will likely need to overcome should they choose to incorporate this imaging modality into their practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".