MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1855654671 · doi:10.1111/trf.13259

Risks associated with red blood cell transfusions: potential benefits from application of pathogen inactivation

2015· article· en· W1855654671 on OpenAlexaff
Steve Kleinman, Adonis Stassinopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContext (archaeology)Red blood cellImmunologyBlood productIntensive care medicineBiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion risks could be reduced if a robust technology for pathogen inactivation of RBC (PI-RBCs) were to be approved. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Estimates of per-unit and per-patient aggregate infectious risks for conventional RBCs were calculated; the latter used patient diagnosis as a determinant of estimated lifetime exposure to RBC units. Existing in vitro data for the two technologies under development for producing PI-RBCs and the status of current clinical trials are reviewed. RESULTS: Minimum and maximum per-unit risk were calculated as 0.0003% (1 in 323,000) and 0.12% (1 in 831), respectively. The minimum estimate is for known lower-risk pathogens while the maximal estimate also includes an emerging infectious agent (EIA) and endemic area Babesia risk. Minimum and maximum per-patient lifetime risks by diagnosis grouping were estimated as 1.5 and 3.3%, respectively, for stem cell transplantation (which includes additional risk for cytomegalovirus transmission); 1.2 and 3.7%, respectively, for myelodysplastic syndrome; and 0.2 and 44%, respectively, for hemoglobinopathy. DISCUSSION: There is potential for PI technologies to reduce infectious RBC risk and to provide additional benefits (e.g., prevention of transfusion-associated graft-versus-host disease and possible reduction of alloimmunization) due to white blood cell inactivation. PI-RBCs should be viewed in the context of having a fully PI-treated blood supply, enabling a blood safety paradigm shift from reactive to proactive. Providing insurance against new EIAs. Further, when approved, the use of PI for all components may catalyze operational changes in blood donor screening, laboratory testing, and component manufacturing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations47
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransfusionSame topicBlood transfusion and managementFrench-language works237,207