MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2526621157 · doi:10.1155/2016/9316385

Quantification of Cell-Free DNA in Red Blood Cell Units in Different Whole Blood Processing Methods

2016· article· en· W2526621157 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew W. Shih, Vinai Bhagirath, Nancy M. Heddle, Jason P. Acker, Yang Liu, John W. Eikelboom, Patricia C. Liaw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Blood Transfusion · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research InstituteCanadian Blood ServicesMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeukoreductionRed blood cellChemistryMedicineBlood transfusionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background . Whole blood donations in Canada are processed by either the red cell filtration (RCF) or whole blood filtration (WBF) methods, where leukoreduction is potentially delayed in WBF. Fresh WBF red blood cells (RBCs) have been associated with increased in-hospital mortality after transfusion. Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is released by neutrophils prior to leukoreduction, degraded during RBC storage, and is associated with adverse patient outcomes. We explored cfDNA levels in RBCs prepared by RCF and WBF and different storage durations. Methods . Equal numbers of fresh (stored ≤14 days) and older RBCs were sampled. cfDNA was quantified by spectrophotometry and PicoGreen. Separate regression models determined the association with processing method and storage duration and their interaction on cfDNA. Results . cfDNA in 120 RBC units (73 RCF, 47 WBF) were measured. Using PicoGreen, WBF units overall had higher cfDNA than RCF units (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn fontstyle="italic">0.0010</mml:mn></mml:math>); fresh WBF units had higher cfDNA than fresh RCF units (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn fontstyle="italic">0.0093</mml:mn></mml:math>). Using spectrophotometry, fresh RBC units overall had higher cfDNA than older units (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn fontstyle="italic">0.0031</mml:mn></mml:math>); fresh WBF RBCs had higher cfDNA than older RCF RBCs (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn fontstyle="italic">0.024</mml:mn></mml:math>). Conclusion . Higher cfDNA in fresh WBF was observed compared to older RCF blood. Further study is required for association with patient outcomes.

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)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.289
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Blood TransfusionSame topicBlood transfusion and managementFrench-language works237,207