Potential impact on blood availability and donor iron status of changes to donor hemoglobin cutoff and interdonation intervals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A minimum male hemoglobin (Hb) level of 13.0 g/dL becomes a Food and Drug Administration requirement effective May 2016. In addition, extending whole blood (WB) interdonation intervals (IDIs) beyond 8 weeks has been considered to reduce iron depletion in repeat blood donors. This study estimates the impact these changes might have on blood availability and donor iron status. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Six blood centers participating in Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study-II (REDS-II) collected information on all donation visits from 2006 to 2009. Simulations were developed from these data using a multistage approach that first sought to adequately reproduce the patterns of donor return, Hb and ferritin levels, and outcomes of a donor's visit (successful single- or double-red blood cell donation, deferral for low Hb) observed in REDS-II data sets. Modified simulations were used to predict the potential impact on the blood supply and donor iron status under different Hb cutoff and IDI qualification criteria. RESULTS: More than 10% of WB donations might require replacement under many simulated scenarios. Longer IDIs would reduce the proportion of donors with iron depletion, but 80% of these donors may remain iron-depleted if minimal IDIs increased to 12 or 16 weeks. CONCLUSION: Higher Hb cutoffs and longer IDIs are predicted to have a potentially large impact on collections but only a modest impact on donor iron depletion. Efforts to address iron depletion should be targeted to at-risk donors, such as iron supplementation programs for frequent donors, and policy makers should try to avoid broadly restrictive donation requirements that could substantially reduce blood availability.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".