How to Compensate the Damages Arising from a Contaminated Blood Transfusion in the Legal Systems of Iran and Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the end of the last century, transmission of viral diseases such as AIDS and HIV through blood transfusions to patients with ‘‘Hemophiliacs’’, to kick up a row the discussion about civil liability arising from contaminated blood transfusion in the case called ‘‘Hemophiliacs’’ end trying to get it drew Hemophiliacs material and moral damage prompted the judiciary . Among the many factors blood transfusion process are involved the responsibility of each of them is subject to certain regulation. For example blood centers, hospitals, doctors, nurse who transfuse the infected blood and resulting that injured party forced to use the infected blood and at the end state because of providing and distribution of blood as a public service. Blood center has a safety commitment and mast distribute a blood to be free of and implication. So they are responsible. Just with transfusion unless they reveal other factors and causes in fact in this case, the most important issue is the way of compensation of injured parties. So not only material remedies resulting transfusion of infected blood is indemnify. But in this point view that no damages should not be remain compensation. In addition moral damages and …….. So because of importance of the subject and importance of the compensation of injured parties, it’s essential to base on…. Theory, implication absolute liability and objective liability for state with assuming the direct role of the state in the management of medical procedures in public hospitals. And the possibility of the direct role of the state in their affliction and regarding the role of the state in public health.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".