Bibliographic record
Abstract
An association between compatible but ABO non-identical red blood cell (RBC) transfusions and increased in-hospital mortality was identified in an observational study. A review of the literature was performed to explore plausible biological mechanisms and inflammation was chosen. This thesis describes a body of work that was performed to develop a PICOT research question and design a pilot feasibility randomized crossover trial in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) to determine whether there is evidence of an inflammatory response resulting from transfusion of ABO non-identical RBCs compared with the transfusion of ABO identical RBCs. The work undertaken as part of this thesis included: identifying a theoretical framework to guide the selection of outcome measures that would detect inflammation; identifying an appropriate and feasible population to study; designing the feasibility pilot study to answer the research question that was developed; and a discussion of ethical issues that were considered as the design of the pilot study was developed. The work that was done to develop the elements of PICOT resulted in the following research question: Is it feasible to perform a randomized crossover trial in chronically transfused blood group A patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), that looks for laboratory evidence of inflammation (in vitro biomarkers measured at baseline and pre-specified times between 1 and 96 hours post transfusion), following the transfusion of group O RBCs (ABO non-identical) compared to transfusion of group A (ABO identical) RBCs?
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".