MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Current incidence and estimated residual risk of transfusion‐transmitted infections in donations made to Canadian Blood Services

2007· article· en· W1995448621 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBlood donation and transfusion practices
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood ServicesUniversity of OttawaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidual riskWindow periodSeroconversionMedicineNatIncidence (geometry)Relative riskSerologyVirologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Hepatitis CHepatitis C virusHepatitis B virusBlood transfusionDemographyImmunologyInternal medicineAntibodyVirusStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: New testing methods such as nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT) and chemiluminescent serologic assays have been introduced, more precise estimates for infectious window periods are available, and a new method for estimating the residual risk (RR) of transfusion-transmitted infections (TTIs) has been developed. Thus, available RR estimates for Canada need to be updated. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Incidence rates for known TTI markers were determined for all allogeneic whole-blood donations made to Canadian Blood Services between 2001 and 2005; they were derived from NAT conversions or seroconversions of repeat donors with at least two donations in a 3-year period. RR estimates for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 and hepatitis C virus (HCV) derived from the classical incidence/window-period model were compared to those obtained by the new method that estimates incidence from NAT-positive, antibody-negative donations (NAT-yield cases) from all donors divided by person-years. RESULTS: With the classical method, the RR of HIV (1 per 7.8 million donations) and HCV (1 per 2.3 million) were low; HBV RR was higher (1 per 153,000). HCV RR was significantly lower when estimated with the new method (1 per 13 million). Eleven HCV NAT-yield cases were predicted by applying the classical method to our seroconversion data but only 2 were observed (p = 0.011). Observed HIV-1 NAT-yield cases (n = 1) matched those predicted (n = 0.7). CONCLUSION: New tests have reduced an already low risk of TTI in Canada. HCV RR estimates by two different methods differed but both were low.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.248 · 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