Effects of applied muscle tension on the likelihood of blood donor return
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Blood donation-related symptoms such as dizziness and fainting are unpleasant for the donor and a significant disincentive for repeat donation. The muscle tensing technique of applied muscle tension reduced symptoms in several studies. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Follow-up data from a randomized controlled trial of different components of applied tension were obtained. The number of subsequent blood donations in a 2-year period was determined for 1059 of 1209 donors originally assigned to one of six conditions involving tension of different muscle groups or donation as usual. RESULTS: In general, women who were assigned to one of the applied tension conditions were significantly more likely to return than women assigned to the donation as usual condition (67% vs. 55%, chi(2)(1) = 4.71, p = 0.03). There was no significant enhancement of return among male donors. Also, there was no association between the actual reduction of symptoms in different applied tension conditions and higher levels of return. CONCLUSION: Participation in a condition that involved learning repeated muscle tension with the expectation that this might help reduce blood donation-related symptoms was associated with a greater likelihood of return for women.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".