MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412728007 · doi:10.3390/jcm14145068

Hemostasis Laboratory Diagnostics in Newborns

2025· review· en· W4412728007 on OpenAlexaff
Chiara Gorio, Angelo Claudio Molinari, Tiziano Martini, Antonietta Ferretti, Giulia Albrici, Giulia Carracchia, Antonella Ierardi, Marzia Leotta, Nicola Portesi, Monica Sacco, Alessandra Strangio, Maria Elisa Mancuso, Rita Santoro

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemostasisIntensive care medicineNeonatal intensive care unitHematocritCoagulationCoagulation testingPediatricsSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hemostatic system in the newborn is a complex entity, characterized by dynamism in its development; therefore, the correct measurement of its potential is challenging. In this narrative review, we analyzed the current knowledge of the "developmental hemostasis" of the newborn; we also studied the performance of routine coagulation tests in its evaluation, with considerations about the establishment of neonatal age-specific normal ranges and about the role of preanalytical variables, in particular, hematocrit (which could represent an important cause of error); we also focused on the increasing importance of viscoelastic coagulation tests, which are becoming increasingly widespread (especially in some settings such as intensive care unit) and are able to quickly provide information about the hemostatic function of the newborn, even if they lack adequate standardization in the neonatal period.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.175
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine→Same topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→