Factors affecting banking quality of umbilical cord blood for transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The most important objective for cord blood banks is to store cord blood units of high quality, which is determined by total nucleated cells (TNCs) and CD34+ cells. Determining the factors affecting the stored life-saving cells would be beneficial to the field. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 4930 cord blood units were collected between January 2007 and October 2009 and processed using a double extraction technique to sediment red blood cells with variable centrifugation time determined by the formula CT = KL - M, where CT is centrifuge time, K is 7.7227, M is 29.742, and L is ln (volume of cord blood with anticoagulant). The recovery rate of TNCs and other relevant factors affecting banking quality were analyzed. RESULTS: The mean recovery rate of TNCs was 97.7 ± 2.5% with 0.04% (2/4930) units below 80% and 10.8% (532/4930) units below 95%. The TNCs per unit was affected by gestation duration (p < 0.01), sex of infant (p < 0.01), mode of delivery (p < 0.01), collection method (p < 0.01), and ethnicity (p < 0.001). The number of postprocessing CD34+ cells was affected only by sex of the infant (p < 0.05). The viability of nucleated cells after processing was 94.8 ± 4.8% and was affected by the number of hours between collection and processing (p < 0.01). In contrast, the viability of CD34+ cells was 99.5 ± 1.0% (n = 30) when samples with low viability of TNCs were assessed. The results did not reveal a significant correlation (r = 0.07, p = 0.38). CONCLUSION: The double extraction technique provides a high and consistent recovery of TNCs, which ensures that more life-saving cells will be banked for transplants.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".