MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063306138 · doi:10.1196/annals.1345.040

Transfusion Safety: Where Are We Today?

2005· review· en· W2063306138 on OpenAlex
Naomi L.C. Luban

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood groups and transfusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood transfusionIntensive care medicineBlood collectionEuropean unionTransfusion medicineMedical emergencyImmunologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decades, the incidence of clinically significant transfusion-transmitted diseases has been dramatically reduced. These reductions have occurred because of a multifocal approach to the collection, processing, and release of blood and blood components. Research has focused on characterizing specific pathogens and their infectious patterns, especially the early viremic phase. Donor motivation and characteristics have been investigated, and restrictive eligibility criteria have been established. Regulatory oversight has been strengthened in the United States and hemovigilance systems established in many countries of the European Union, Canada, and Japan to identify new and emerging infectious and noninfectious transfusion risks. Such systems are required because many emerging pathogens will elude the stringent and sensitive donor testing already in place which, unfortunately, requires advanced technologies. Despite the remarkable progress, the processes of delivering a transfusion to a patient provide additional opportunity for risk, but have been less- well studied and the solutions have been less-well defined. Specific areas of concern include the collection and correct identification of patient samples, selection of modified or unique products, blood administration process, and establishment of specific indications for transfusion. In this chapter, we review the status of transfusion safety in the United States and discuss some emerging infectious and noninfectious risks of transfusion that will become future areas for basic and translational research. The disparities that exist in blood safety in developing countries' red cell alloimmunization and autoimmunity will not be covered.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.811

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.235 · 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