Selective testing for <scp><i>Trypanosoma cruzi</i></scp>: the first year after implementation at <scp>C</scp>anadian <scp>B</scp>lood <scp>S</scp>ervices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Various testing strategies may reduce the risk of Chagas disease transmission in nonendemic, low-prevalence countries. Results of the first year of selective testing of at-risk donors at Canadian Blood Services are reported. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Since February 2009, platelets were not produced from at-risk donors. Since May 2010, at-risk donors were tested for Trypanosoma cruzi antibodies. Donors testing positive were interviewed about risk factors, and lookback studies were initiated. RESULTS: There were 7255 at-risk donors of 421,979 donors screened (1.72%). Risk factors were born in Latin America (50.6%), mother or maternal grandmother born in Latin America (28%), and 6 months or more travel history or residence in Latin America (19%). Sixteen (16) at-risk donors had T. cruzi repeat-reactive test results of whom 13 confirmed positive. Eleven of 13 were born in Latin America (nine in Paraguay and two in Argentina), and the other two were born in Canada but had short-term travel history and mothers who had been born in Latin America. Ten of the donors spoke German as their first language (all of those born in Paraguay and one born in Canada). There were 148 previous donations (176 components transfused) evaluated by lookback, of which 28% of recipients could be tested. None were positive. CONCLUSION: Selective testing has mitigated a small risk to the blood supply with very few false-positive results. Most positive donors were born in a risk country, with a concentration of German-speaking immigrants from Paraguay. Residency or travel alone were not clear risk factors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".