MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2396044539 · doi:10.1007/978-1-59745-553-4_2

Single Base Extension in Multiplex Blood Group Genotyping

2009· review· en· W2396044539 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory A. Denomme

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood groups and transfusion
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenotypingSingle-nucleotide polymorphismMultiplexGenotypeMultiplex polymerase chain reactionWhole bloodSNPOligonucleotideBiologyBlood transfusionSNP genotypingImmunologyMedicineMolecular biologyGeneticsPolymerase chain reactionDNAGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transfusion recipients who become alloimmunized to blood group antigens require antigen-negative blood to limit adverse transfusion reactions. An alternative strategy to phenotyping blood is to assay genomic DNA for the associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). A multiplex PCR coupled with a single base oligonucleotide extension assay using genomic DNA can identify SNPs related to D, C/c, E/e, S/s, K/k, Kp(a/b), Fy(a/b), Fy0 (-33 promoter silencing polymorphism), Jk(a/b), Di(a/b), and HPA-1a/b. Using this technology, individual SNP call rates vary from 98 to 100%. The platform has the capacity to genotype thousands of samples per day. The suite of SNPs provides rapid data for both blood donors and transfusion recipients and is poised to change whose blood is provided for potential transfusion recipients. The potential to dramatically lower the incidence of alloimmunization and to avoid serious hemolytic complications of transfusions can be realized with the implementation of this technology.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.007

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicBlood groups and transfusionFrench-language works237,207