A policy analysis of major decisions relating to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and the blood supply.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) is the first major challenge that the blood system has faced since the completion of the Krever inquiry in 1997. We report the results of a detailed policy analysis comparing 2 CJD-related decisions: a 1995 recall of blood from a donor with classic CJD and the 1999 decision to defer donations from individuals with a 6-month travel history to the UK between 1980 and 1996 due to concerns related to variant CJD. Overall, we observed that decision-making improved significantly from 1995 to 1999. In 1998/99 the potential threat of variant CJD was identified at an early stage, and a systematic risk assessment process was initiated. Decision-making was consultative and involved consumers. However, the perception existed that further improvement could take place in the areas of transparency of process and interaction of organizations. We observed that the presence of a second operator had an important impact on decision-making in 1998/99.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".