A review of research related to blood transfusion in Canada, 2000–2002
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The former National Blood Safety Council undertook a comprehensive review of blood transfusion research in Canada for the years 2000 through 2002. Data were acquired by direct contact with agencies which support such research and by searches of the relevant websites. Total grant support increased markedly over the 3-year period, from 4.1 million dollars to 18.5 million dollars. Publicly funded granting agencies, biopharmaceutical companies, the blood services and the province of Ontario were major supporters. Much smaller amounts were granted from charitable organizations. Clinical research attracted the majority of the funding, although a larger number of projects were basic science in nature. Most research was carried out in the provinces of Ontario, Québec and British Columbia. Although we have not assessed the productivity of blood-related research, it appears that substantial amounts of funding were allocated to these projects between 2000 and 2002. These data may provide a helpful perspective to investigators in transfusion medicine elsewhere, who may also be assessing the relative priority given to this field of research in their own countries.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
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.
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".