Reflex factor coagulation testing in patients with an unexplained prolonged aPTT: An institutional retrospective review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aim to determine the clinical utility of reflex coagulation investigations (RCI) for prolonged lupus insensitive activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) at our institution. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all potential RCI (lupus insensitive aPTT of ≥32s) from April 2014 to June 2019. Our diagnostic algorithm requires completion of RCI only if samples had no interfering medications to explain a prolonged aPTT and were either from a preoperative sample or from a patient presenting with unexplained bleeding. Appropriate RCI samples undergo further investigations with one-stage factor activity testing for factors 8(FVIII), 9(FIX), and 11(FXI) reflexively. Data were obtained through electronic medical records to capture clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, prophylactic hemostatic replacement, and bleeding outcomes. RESULTS: Three thousand and three hundreds seventeen samples from 2940 distinct patients were considered as potential RCI during the study period. 263/3317 (8%) samples had RCI completed. Of those, 55/263 (21%) had abnormal factor testing, with the majority from preoperative setting (43/55; 78%). 5/43 (12%) patients were referred to hematology for preoperative evaluation. 5/43 patients received preoperative hemostatic support. A total of 5 patients (5/43) developed postop bleeding. Six patients (6/55) had RCI for unexplained bleeding, and five patients (83%) had a newly identified clinically significant bleeding disorder. CONCLUSION: Reflex coagulation investigations benefited patients presenting with unexplained bleeding as this expedited the diagnosis and management of clinically significant bleeding disorders. RCI for preoperative evaluation infrequently led to additional hemostatic support/referral to hematology. The lack of additional workup for an abnormal factor activity level suggests laboratory alert fatigue as a potential contributory factor.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".