Recurrent stroke: the role of thrombophilia in a large international pediatric stroke population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the article pre-published online on January 24, 2019 and published in the paper version of Haematologica [volume 104(8):1676-1681; doi:10.3324/haematol2018.211433] we have to correct: • that recurrent stroke occurred in 160/872 (instead of 160 / 880) children [page 1678, second column, line 6]. • the incidence rates of recurrent AIS with respect to the individual exposure time in years given in the abstract (page 1676, lines 16-18) and in the results section (page 1679, paragraph "prothrombotic risk factors", lines 38-40). As explained in the methods section, we calculated the absolute risk of AIS recurrence as incidence rates per 100 patient-years (%). According to the individual exposure times (years) to antithrombin, lipoprotein (a) and the presence of more than one prothrombotic risk factor the incidence rates calculated per 100 patient-years are presented in the table below {table presented}.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".