Moderate-intensity aerobic exercise vs desmopressin in adolescent males with mild hemophilia A: a randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persons with mild hemophilia A (HA) may use intranasal desmopressin prior to sports participation. Desmopressin is expensive and can cause vomiting, headache, palpitation, and occasionally seizures. Our group has previously documented a 2.3-fold increase in factor VIII activity (FVIII:C) in adolescents with mild HA after moderate-intensity aerobic exercise. Herein, we report principal findings of a randomized trial of intranasal desmopressin vs a standardized, moderate-intensity aerobic exercise regimen in adolescents with mild HA. Our primary objective was to compare the change in FVIII:C associated with these 2 interventions. We also examined changes in hemostatic parameters arising from their sequential administration. The study was conducted simultaneously at the Hospital for Sick Children, Canada, and Nationwide Children's Hospital, USA. Thirty-two eligible male adolescents (mean age ± standard deviation: 16.1 ± 2.6 years) with mild HA (mean baseline FVIII:C: 27.9% ± 18.4%) were randomized to 1 of 4 study arms (desmopressin followed by exercise, desmopressin alone, exercise followed by desmopressin, and exercise alone). Blood work was obtained at baseline and at 3 subsequent time-points. Participants randomized to exercise cycled on an ergometer for approximately 12 minutes, with the final 3 minutes at 85% of their predicted maximum heart rate. Standard weight-based dosing of desmopressin was used. Mean immediate increase in FVIII:C was 1.7-fold with exercise compared with 1.9-fold with desmopressin (noninferiority, P = .04). Exercise-induced improvement in hemostatic parameters including FVIII:C was brief compared with more sustained improvements seen with desmopressin. More than 60% of participants randomized to receive both exercise and desmopressin achieved normal (>50%) FVIII:C, 75 and 135 minutes into the study protocol.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".