{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.036011080332409975, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014773776546629732, 'mean_word_length': 5.6503067484662575, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
An analysis of hematologic disorders presenting in the private practice of hematology.

Many residents and fellows enter specialty training programs with vague notions as to what the clinical practice of their specialty will be like. Such speculation on the author’s part seems reasonable because the house staff is usually exposed to the specialty only in the hospital environment, and not in the private practitioner’s office. As well, there is little written information about the composition of a specialty practice. In order to evaluate the composition of a private hematology practice, 939 consecutive patients were evaluated as to their diagnostic categories. Such analysis reveals the following broad categories: anemias, 42%; white blood cell disorders, 12%; lymphomas and other nodes disorders, 12%; no hematological disorders, 12%; thrombocytopenia and allergic purpuras, 7%; plasma clotting disorders, 7%; splenic disorders, 4%; erythrocytosis, 2%; and plasma cell disorders, 2%. Each of the aforementioned categories were further subdivided into their specific diseases.