The Impact of Prophylaxis on the Quality of Life of Boys with Haemophilia—A Twin-centre Study from South India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aims: Quality of life (QOL) of boys with haemophilia was severely affected due to many reasons like frequent hospital visits and joint stiffness. This study aims to analyse the impact of the prophylaxis programme on the QOL of haemophiliac boys. Methods: This is a twin-centre cross-sectional study that included all boys with haemophilia aged between 4 and 18 years and receiving prophylaxis. The Canadian Haemophilia Outcome – Kids Life Assessment Tool (CHO-KLAT) Version 3 was used to compare pre-prophylaxis scores with post-prophylaxis scores obtained after four months of prophylaxis. Results: The mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of the study participants was 10.66 (1.28) years. About 88% had haemophilia A and 66.66% had good adherence to prophylaxis. The mean pre-prophylaxis total score was 45.6 (4.9) and the mean post-prophylaxis total score was 64.3 (5.4). Significant improvement in total scores and domain scores was observed in the post-prophylaxis group.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".