MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077726525 · doi:10.1542/peds.2012-1181

Translational Research in Pediatrics II: Blood Collection, Processing, Shipping, and Storage

2013· review· en· W2077726525 on OpenAlexaff
Carolina Gillio‐Meina, Gediminas Cepinskas, Erin L. Cecchini, Douglas D. Fraser

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteTranslational Research in Oncology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnalyteBlood samplingWhole bloodApheresisTranslational researchPlateletIntensive care medicineBioinformaticsImmunologyPathologyInternal medicineChromatographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Translational research often involves tissue sampling and analysis. Blood is by far the most common tissue collected. Due to the many difficulties encountered with blood procurement from children, it is imperative to maximize the quality and stability of the collected samples to optimize research results. Collected blood can remain whole or be fractionated into serum, plasma, or cell concentrates such as red blood cells, leukocytes, or platelets. Serum and plasma can be used for analyte studies, including proteins, lipids, and small molecules, and as a source of cell-free nucleic acids. Cell concentrates are used in functional studies, flow cytometry, culture experiments, or as a source for cellular nucleic acids. Before initiating studies on blood, a thorough evaluation of practices that may influence analyte and/or cellular integrity is required. Thus, it is imperative that child health researchers working with human blood are aware of how experimental results can be altered by blood sampling methods, times to processing, container tubes, presence or absence of additives, shipping and storage variables, and freeze-thaw cycles. The authors of this review, in an effort to encourage and optimize translational research using blood from pediatric patients, outline best practices for blood collection, processing, shipment, and storage.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.241
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations81
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlFrench-language works237,207