Magnetic resonance imaging in boys with severe hemophilia A: Serial and end‐of‐study findings from the Canadian Hemophilia Primary Prophylaxis Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examined the structural outcomes for joints of boys with severe hemophilia A receiving frequency/dose-escalated primary prophylaxis using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and the importance of interval MRI changes. METHODS: Forty-six subjects (27 with interval studies) were evaluated by radiographs (X-rays) and mid- and end-of-study MRIs (using the International Prophylaxis Study Group scale), as part of the Canadian Hemophilia Prophylaxis Study. The primary outcome was the presence of MRI osteochondral findings. RESULTS: The median (range) time on study at the end-of-study MRI examination was 9.6 (4.8-16.0) years, during which 18 of 46 subjects (39%) had osteochondral changes in at least one joint. An interval change in MRI score of at least 1 point was observed in 44% of joints (43 ankles, 21 elbows, 4 knees); at least one joint showed this change in all 27 subjects. Self-reported interval hemarthrosis was associated with a higher likelihood of interval osteochondral change (odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-2.06). Presence of synovial hypertrophy or hemosiderin on interval MRIs was associated with an OR of 4.71 (95% CI, 1.92-11.57) and 5.25 (95% CI, 2.05-13.40) of later osteochondral changes on MRI. DISCUSSION: MRI changes were seen in 39% of subjects. Interval index joint bleeding was associated with an increased risk of later MRI changes, and earlier soft-tissue changes were associated with subsequent osteochondral changes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".