MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How to use: the direct antiglobulin test in newborns

2014· review· en· W2130879216 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Disease in Childhood Education & Practice · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Health and Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoombs testABO blood group systemHaemolytic diseaseImmunologyMedicineComplement (music)AntibodyRh blood group systemTest (biology)DiseasePregnancyBiologyPathologyFetusGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The direct antiglobulin test (DAT) detects the presence of immunoglobulin, complement or both bound to the red blood cell membrane. The test, historically called the 'Coombs test', was first described in 1945 by Cambridge immunologist Robin Coombs. Suspected haemolytic disease of the newborn, due to either Rhesus disease or ABO incompatibility, is one of most common reasons for requesting a DAT in newborns. In this article, we discuss the physiological background and technological background of the DAT. We also provide a clinical framework for a rational approach to the use and interpretation of the DAT in newborns.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.340 · 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