MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203126991 · doi:10.1111/ijlh.13724

Reflex factor coagulation testing in patients with an unexplained prolonged aPTT: An institutional retrospective review

2021· article· en· W3203126991 on OpenAlexaff
Eman M. Mansory, Fadi Bahodi, Chai W. Phua

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Laboratory Hematology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePartial thromboplastin timeCoagulation testingHematologyProthrombin timeInternal medicineLupus anticoagulantRetrospective cohort studyMedical recordCoagulationCoagulopathySurgeryThrombosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Laboratory HematologySame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207