Reporting of transfusion reactions in a hospital in Brazil.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dear Sir, Recently Maria de Fatima Alves Fernandes and her colleagues reported some results and perspectives about haemovigilance in Brazil1, so here we want to present our haemovigilance findings in a regional hospital of the state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Haemovigilance systems started to be established in 1992 in Japan2 and then in France (1994)3, Germany (1994), Greece (1995), Luxembourg and the United Kingdom (1996)4. The principle aims of haemovigilance programmes are to detect and analyse untoward effects of blood transfusion in order to correct their causes and to prevent recurrence and, thereby, safeguard patients' safety. There are differences in reporting between haemovigilance systems. United Kingdom and Ireland operate with voluntary reporting of serious and incompatible blood component transfusion reactions while in the Netherlands and Quebec all reactions are reported on a voluntary basis. In France the system involves mandatory reporting of all reactions5. A national haemovigilance system was officially implemented in Brazil in 2002 starting with a network of 100 tertiary hospitals with voluntary reporting of all reactions. In 2009 the reported rate of reactions was 0.91/1,000 transfusions1. Information on reporting of transfusion reactions in non-tertiary hospitals outside this network in Brazil has not been published so far. Our aim is to present the reporting of transfusion reactions in a regional hospital of the Southern state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. During a 5-year period (2006–2010) 28 reactions were reported in 10,790 transfusions (2.6/1,000). The transfusion reactions were identified by nurses who first contacted the physician to decide how to manage the reaction and then subsequently made a written report to the blood bank, notifying the name of the patient, the characteristics of the reaction and its severity. The majority of the transfused patients had chronic benign diseases, cancer, previous accidents or were waiting for or recovering from surgery. Later the reported reactions were classified as febrile, allergic, haemolytic and both febrile and allergic. No severe reaction was observed. The reactions were of a febrile type in 17 cases, allergic in seven cases, haemolytic in one case and had both febrile and allergic features in one other case; in two reports no information was given about the type of reaction. The observed reporting of reactions (2.6/1,000 transfused units) did not differ much from that in France (2.83/1,000 units) and the Netherlands (2.9/1,000 units)5.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».