MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392013442 · doi:10.4103/ajop.ajop_29_23

Bone mineral density among β–thalassemic children: age and sex comparative study

2023· article· en· W4392013442 on OpenAlexaff
Saad S. Abozid, Omar Elalfy, Said S. El-Feky, Hekmat Samir, Reem Abdelghafour, Tarek M. A. Abdallah

Bibliographic record

VenueAlexandria Journal of Pediatrics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBone mineralMedicineThalassemiaParathyroid hormoneInternal medicineSerum ferritinCalciumEndocrinologyDual energyFerritinPhysiologyOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Parathyroid function and bone mineral density (BMD) in β–thalassemia major (β-TM) patients are provided. Some recent suggestions are presented about the cellular and structural changes in thalassemia bones. Aim The current work aims to study BMD and related mineral and hormonal profiles in β-TM cases and its relation to the sex and age strata of the patients. Patients and methods The study includes 30 healthy control and 55 β-TM patients who were divided into subgroups according to age and sex. Parathormone (PTH), ferritin, and calcium were investigated. The dual-energy radiography absorptiometry were used to the assessment of BMD. Results Serum ferritin level was as expected significantly elevated in β-TM cases. Serum PTH was significantly lower in β-TM cases when matched with healthy control. Serum calcium was within normal in β-TM. BMD of lumber spine in β-TM was markedly detracted when matched with the healthy normal group. 76% of our cases showed reduced BMD. Conclusion BMD is reduced in 76% of β-TM. PTH is reduced in all age strata of β-TM.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlexandria Journal of PediatricsSame topicHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207