Weak D type 67 in four related Canadian blood donors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Correct donor D typing is critical to prevent recipient alloimmunization. No method can detect all variants, and the immunogenicity of many variants is unknown. Routine ABO and D serologic typings are performed in our laboratory by automated microplate testing. Until 2011, routine confirmation of D- status of first-time donors was performed by the manual tube indirect antiglobulin test (IAT); this was replaced by automated solid-phase testing including weak D testing by IAT. Selected donors are investigated by other methods. We describe four weak D type 67 (RHD*01W.67) donors whose samples tested as D- by automated microplate and manual methods but were later determined to be D+ by automated solid-phase and RHD gene analysis. Solid-phase serologic and molecular typing results of all four donors were identical. It was identified that the donors are of English-Irish descent; two are brothers and the others are cousins. Transfusion of blood from one of these donors likely resulted in alloimmunization to D in one of three recipients tested since no other documented exposures were identified. Lookback studies determined that two other D- recipients were not alloimmunized.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".