MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1551870152 · doi:10.1111/trf.12468

The <scp>N</scp>ational <scp>H</scp>eart, <scp>L</scp>ung, and <scp>B</scp>lood <scp>I</scp>nstitute <scp>R</scp>ecipient <scp>E</scp>pidemiology and <scp>D</scp>onor <scp>E</scp>valuation <scp>S</scp>tudy (<scp>REDS</scp>‐<scp>III</scp>): a research program striving to improve blood donor and transfusion recipient outcomes

2013· article· en· W1551870152 on OpenAlexaff
Steven Kleinman, Michael P. Busch, Edward L. Murphy, Hua Shan, Paul M. Ness, Simone A. Glynn

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBlood donation and transfusion practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsDonationMedicineBlood transfusionEpidemiologyBusinessSurgeryInternal medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-III (REDS-III) is a 7-year multicenter transfusion safety research initiative launched in 2011 by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The domestic component involves four blood centers, 12 hospitals, a data coordinating center, and a central laboratory. The international component consists of distinct programs in Brazil, China, and South Africa, which involve US and in-country investigators. RESULTS: REDS-III is using two major methods to address key research priorities in blood banking and transfusion medicine. First, there will be numerous analyses of large "core" databases; the international programs have each constructed a donor and donation database while the domestic program has established a detailed research database that links data from blood donors and their donations, the components made from these donations, and data extracts from the electronic medical records of the recipients of these components. Second, there are more than 25 focused research protocols involving transfusion recipients, blood donors, or both that either are in progress or are scheduled to begin within the next 3 years. Areas of study include transfusion epidemiology and blood utilization, transfusion outcomes, noninfectious transfusion risks, human immunodeficiency virus-related safety issues (particularly in the international programs), emerging infectious agents, blood component quality, donor health and safety, and other donor issues. CONCLUSIONS: It is intended that REDS-III serve as an impetus for more widespread recipient and linked donor-recipient research in the United States as well as to help assure a safe and available blood supply in the United States and in international locations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.016

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations104
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransfusionSame topicBlood donation and transfusion practicesFrench-language works237,207