Theory of change and strategic priorities of the world federation of haemophilia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The World Federation of Haemophilia (WFH) is a global network of national member organizations (NMOs) that advocate, collectively and individually, to improve lives of people with inherited bleeding disorders. The WFH vision of "Treatment for All" speaks to a future in which all people with an inherited bleeding disorder will have access to care, regardless of their gender or where they live. Over the last several years, initiatives including the WFH Humanitarian Aid program, the World Bleeding Disorders Registry, and Guidelines for the Management of Haemophilia and von Willebrand disease have significantly changed how the WFH and its partners work to improve and sustain care for people with bleeding disorders. Following an extensive consultation that included over 200 stakeholders from 70 countries, a Theory of Change was developed, and strategic priorities identified, to clearly define the WFH's intended impact and point of accountability to its stakeholders, and to determine how and through who those goals will be achieved. Both should help the WFH better support its NMOs and healthcare providers around the world in their efforts to improve access to diagnosis and care, as new therapies revolutionize the treatment landscape and the fallout of the global pandemic continues to challenge the ways in which we work and connect. Global collaboration of all stakeholders, based on their resources, objectives and skills, will be required to achieve these goals and to ensure more people have reliable access to safe treatment and care, regardless of their bleeding disorder, gender, or where they live.
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 | 0.026 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".