MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336785493 · doi:10.1039/c6an00373g

Raman spectroscopy as a novel tool for monitoring biochemical changes and inter-donor variability in stored red blood cell units

2016· article· en· W2336785493 on OpenAlexaff
Chad G. Atkins, Kevin Buckley, Deborah Chen, H. Georg Schulze, Dana V. Devine, Michael W. Blades, Robin F. B. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Analyst · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythrocyte Function and Pathophysiology
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreVancouver Biotech (Canada)University of British Columbia
FundersCalifornia HIV/AIDS Research Program
KeywordsRaman spectroscopyRed blood cellChemistryBlood preservationRed CellChromatographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)BiochemistryMedicineAndrologyInternal medicineOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individual units of donated red blood cells (RBCs) do not ordinarily undergo analytical testing prior to transfusion. This study establishes the utility of Raman spectroscopy for analyzing the biochemistry of stored RBC supernatant and reveals interesting storage-related changes about the accumulation of lactate, a chemical species that may be harmful to certain patients. The data show measurable variations in supernatant composition and demonstrate that some units of donated RBCs accumulate lactate much more readily than others. The spectra also indicate a higher relative concentration of lactate in units collected from male donors than female donors (p = 0.004) and imply that there is a greater degree of variability at later stages of storage in units from older male donors (>45 years). The study proves that Raman analysis has promise for elucidating the relationship between the metabolism of stored RBCs and donor characteristics. It also suggests that there may be benefit in developing a Raman instrument for the rapid non-invasive assessment of blood-bag biochemistry by measuring through plastic over-layers.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AnalystSame topicErythrocyte Function and PathophysiologyFrench-language works237,207