International Survey of the Management of Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation Among Pediatric and Neonatal Health Care Practitioners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH) provides objective disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) measurement through diagnostic criteria validated in adults. The applicability of these criteria in pediatric and neonatal DIC is controversial and unvalidated. Primary objective: to evaluate current practice in pediatric and neonatal DIC management among different specialties. Secondary objective: to understand the potential impact of developmental hemostasis on DIC laboratory evaluation. We performed a multicenter survey between January and September 2016. The questionnaire was distributed internationally through professional societies. In all, 211 responses were received, of which 160 were full responses and 51 were partial. Overall, 85% of respondents practiced in tertiary academic centers; 70% practiced in pediatric-only hospitals. The majority of respondents (42%) used their personal clinical experience in the management of DIC. Sixty percent of respondents treated DIC until the resolution of both clinical and laboratory parameters. Laboratory investigations were monitored in the majority of DIC cases without thrombosis or bleeding (80%); age-specific reference ranges for tests were lacking in 20% of pediatric-only hospitals and 35% of combined pediatric/adult hospitals. Adherence to standardized DIC guidelines was poor but varied by geographical location. This survey reveals variable practices among pediatricians in the management of DIC. Further studies are needed to validate the DIC diagnostic criteria in children.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".