MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035793682 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v7n1p322

Proactive Risk Assessment of Blood Transfusion Process, in Pediatric Emergency, Using the Health Care Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (HFMEA)

2014· article· en· W2035793682 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Reza Dehnavieh, Hossein Ebrahimipour, Yasamin Molavi‐Taleghani, Ali Vafaee Najar, Somayeh Noori Hekmat, Hamid Esmailzdeh

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMashhad University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsFailure mode and effects analysisMedicineBlood transfusionHazardRisk assessmentMedical emergencyFault tree analysisHealth careEmergency medicineReliability engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Pediatric emergency has been considered as a high risk area, and blood transfusion is known as a unique clinical measure, therefore this study was conducted with the purpose of assessing the proactive risk assessment of blood transfusion process in Pediatric Emergency of Qaem education- treatment center in Mashhad, by the Healthcare Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (HFMEA) methodology. METHODOLOGY: This cross-sectional study analyzed the failure mode and effects of blood transfusion process by a mixture of quantitative-qualitative method. The proactive HFMEA was used to identify and analyze the potential failures of the process. The information of the items in HFMEA forms was collected after obtaining a consensus of experts' panel views via the interview and focus group discussion sessions. RESULTS: The Number of 77 failure modes were identified for 24 sub-processes enlisted in 8 processes of blood transfusion. Totally 13 failure modes were identified as non-acceptable risk (a hazard score above 8) in the blood transfusion process and were transferred to the decision tree. Root causes of high risk modes were discussed in cause-effect meetings and were classified based on the UK national health system (NHS) approved classifications model. Action types were classified in the form of acceptance (11.6%), control (74.2%) and elimination (14.2%). Recommendations were placed in 7 categories using TRIZ ("Theory of Inventive Problem Solving.") CONCLUSION: The re-engineering process for the required changes, standardizing and updating the blood transfusion procedure, root cause analysis of blood transfusion catastrophic events, patient identification bracelet, training classes and educational pamphlets for raising awareness of personnel, and monthly gathering of transfusion medicine committee have all been considered as executive strategies in work agenda in pediatric emergency.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.428 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsFrench-language works237,207