Musculoskeletal ultrasound in hemophilia: Results and recommendations from a global survey and consensus meeting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: For persons with hemophilia, optimization of joint outcomes is an important unmet need. The aim of this initiative was to determine use of ultrasound in evaluating arthropathy in persons with hemophilia, and to move toward consensus among hemophilia care providers regarding the preferred ultrasound protocols for global adaptation. METHODS: A global survey of hemophilia treatment centers was conducted that focused on understanding how and why ultrasound was being used and endeavored to move toward consensus definitions of both point-of-care musculoskeletal ultrasound (POC-MSKUS) and full diagnostic ultrasound, terminology to describe structures being assessed by ultrasound, and how these assessments should be interpreted. Next, an in-person meeting of an international group of hemophilia health care professionals and patient representatives was held, with the objective of achieving consensus regarding the acquisition and interpretation of POC-MSKUS and full diagnostic ultrasound for use in the assessment of musculoskeletal (MSK) pathologies in persons with hemophilia. RESULTS: The recommendations were that clear definitions of the types of ultrasound examinations should be adopted and that a standardized ultrasound scoring/measurement system should be developed, tested, and implemented. The scoring/measurement system should be tiered to allow for a range of complexity yet maintain the ability for comparison across levels. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound is an evolving technology increasingly used for the assessment of MSK outcomes in persons with hemophilia. As adoption increases globally for clinical care and research, it will become increasingly important to establish clear guidelines for image acquisition, interpretation, and reporting to ensure accuracy, consistency, and comparability across groups.
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 | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".