MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1556156417 · doi:10.21236/ada612360

RBC Storage Effect on Coagulation, Microparticles and Microchimerism in Critically Ill Patients

2012· report· en· W1556156417 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philip C. Spinella, Phillip Norris, Avani Shah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCritically illMicroparticleCoagulationAdverse effectIntensive care medicineInternal medicineEmergency medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract : The study aims include investigating specific mechanisms of adverse effects related to RBC storage age in critically ill patients. IRB approvals for the clinical sites participating in this study have been approved, and patient enrollment began in March 2011. Thus far, we have enrolled 37 patients, from whom samples have been collected, processed, shipped from Canada to San Francisco. We have begun HLA typing and this has been completed for 10 patients Day 0 samples so far. As there were delays in initiation of collecting patient samples, we have not begun coagulation and microparticle testing on the patient samples yet. Optimization work for the microparticle studies have built on related NIH-funded studies of in vitro properties of microparticles, refining the list of activation markers to be tested. The tests of patient samples will be performed in batches once enough samples have been obtained to minimize batch-to-batch variability in the testing results.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery→French-language works237,207→