MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

1-year survival in haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis: a nationwide cohort study from England 2003–2018

2023· other· en· W6921288680 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComputational and Text Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComorbidityProportional hazards modelMalignancyConfidence intervalYoung adultCohort studySurvival analysisEpidemiologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is a lethal syndrome of excessive immune activation. We undertook a nationwide study in England of all cases of HLH diagnosed between 2003 and 2018, using linked electronic health data from hospital admissions and death certification. We modelled interactions between demographics and comorbidities and estimated one-year survival by calendar year, age group, gender and comorbidity (haematological malignancy, auto-immune, other malignancy) using Cox regression. There were 1628 people with HLH identified. Overall, crude one-year survival was 50% (95% Confidence interval 48–53%) which varied substantially with age (0–4: 61%; 5–14: 76%; 15–54: 61%; > 55: 24% p < 0.01), sex (males, 46%, worse than females, 55% p < 0.01) and associated comorbidity (auto-immune, 69%, haematological malignancy 28%, any other malignancy, 37% p < 0.01). Those aged < 54 years had a threefold increased risk of death at 1-year amongst HLH associated with malignancy compared to auto-immune. However, predicted 1-year survival decreased markedly with age in those with auto-immune (age 0–14, 84%; 15–54, 73%; > 55, 27%) such that among those > 55 years, survival was as poor as for patients with haematological malignancy. One-year survival following a diagnosis of HLH varies considerably by age, gender and associated comorbidity. Survival was better in those with auto-immune diseases among the young and middle age groups compared to those with an underlying malignancy, whereas in older age groups survival was uniformly poor regardless of the underlying disease process.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 venueFigshareSame topicComputational and Text Analysis MethodsFrench-language works237,207