Professional education of procurement transplant coordinators in Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As only 81 brain dead (BD) organ donations had been performed in Japan for 13 years since 1997 because of very strict Organ Transplantation Act, the Act was revised on 17th July in 2010. By renewal of the Act, organs can be donated after BD with consent from their family, if he or she did not deny organ donation. By this renewal, there has been 4 or 5 fold increase in BD. There are 88 procurement transplant coordinators (PTC) in Japan. 34 PTCs belong to Japan Organ Network (JOT) and others to each administrative division. JOT has made guideline manuals of standard roles and procedures of PTC during organ procurement in BD donors and donors after cardiac death. In order to manage increased organ donations after the revision of the Act, we needed to modify the education systems. First, the guideline manuals of PTC were modified to correspond with the revised Transplant Act and guidelines made by the Government. Second, all PTC got together in the same meeting room to learn the new organ procurement system to deal with the revised Transplant Act and guidelines. Third, the special education programs for 2 months were provided for the 5 to 10 newcomers. Last, the practical training in each donor case by elder PTC was also done for newcomers. Topics of the education program were as follows: the revised transplant Act and guidelines, family approach for organ donation, BD diagnosis, donor evaluation and management, organ procurement and preservation, allocation system, hospital development and family care In the future, each PTC will be divided into special categories, such as the donor family PTC, the donor management PTC and the operation room PTC. Therefore, we need to make special education program for each category in the near future.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".