Bibliographic record
Abstract
The feature Images in Haematology on Transfusion-Related Acute Lung Injury (Quinn & Murphy, 2005) is a timely reminder of the seriousness and severity of this condition. The clinical features and accompanying radiograph is a classical description of the features required to make the diagnosis, and is fully in agreement with the Canadian Consensus definition recently agreed (Kleinman et al (2004), and the accepted clinical definition of acute lung injury (ALI), as proposed by the American-European Consensus Committee on adult respiratory distress syndrome (Bernard et al (1994). However, there is a significant error in the recommendation made by the authors in suggesting that 21 h is the cut-off point after transfusion. The Canadian Consensus meeting (Kleinman et al, 2004) gives 1 h after a transfusion as the time limit for transfusion associated ALI. Data for the UK Serious Hazards of Transfusion (SHOT) reporting system (Goldman et al, 2005) confirm that 91% of TRALI cases occur within 1 h, with criteria that predate the Consensus meeting (Kleinman et al, 2004). This may seem a relatively trivial distinction, but the confirmed diagnosis of TRALI is entirely clinical, with laboratory investigation being focussed on identifying implicated donor/donations, not confirming the diagnosis. Presumptive diagnosis of TRALI on loose criteria diverts important resources toward inappropriate investigations, and the potential unnecessary exclusion of donors.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".