MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1793783898 · doi:10.1111/trf.12630

Impact of ethnicity on human umbilical cord blood banking: a systematic review

2014· review· en· W1793783898 on OpenAlexafffund
Celine Akyurekli, J Y S Chan, Heidi Elmoazzen, Jason Tay, David Allan

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood ServicesOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Blood Services
KeywordsUmbilical cordCord bloodEthnic groupMedicineHaematopoiesisCordObstetricsInternal medicineSurgeryImmunologyStem cellBiologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: How ethnicity impacts characteristics of umbilical cord blood collected by cord blood banks remains unclear. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: After a systematic search, we identified 11 studies for analysis that reported on various variables of collected cord blood units. RESULTS: Non-Caucasian ethnicity of the cord blood donor was associated with a higher risk of failing to meet banking criteria, lower cord blood volume, reduced total nucleated cell count, fewer CD34+ cells, and reduced colony-forming units. CONCLUSIONS: Non-Caucasian ethnicity is associated with reductions in hematopoietic measures of collected cord blood units. Public banking efforts will have to balance issues related to building ethnic diversity within the bank and maintaining the characteristics of banked units that remain desirable by transplant centers.

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)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransfusionSame topicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationFrench-language works237,207