Survey of Institutional Policies for Provision of “CMV-Safe” Blood in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Debate continues on whether leukoreduction alone (LR) is sufficiently similar to leukoreduced cellular products drawn from cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seronegative (SN) donors to minimize the risk of transfusion-transmitted CMV (TT-CMV). We sought to determine the policy, inventory, and practice landscape of the province for TT-CMV mitigation. METHODS: A web-based survey was distributed to hospitals in Ontario by Canadian Blood Services to collect data on their policies with respect to TT-CMV prevention. RESULTS: TT-CMV mitigation practices varied by patient population, hospital size, and region. Smaller institutions remain committed to dual prevention, whereas academic hospitals favor a single-measure approach. Although smaller institutions attempt to align their policies with leadership sites, emulation is often inaccurate. The demands for SN products also appear to be significantly lower than the current screening practices of Canadian Blood Services. CONCLUSIONS: Standardization is lacking on practices to prevent TT-CMV. Although there are barriers to harmonizing practices, the apparent shift to policies acknowledging LR as a sufficient protection is likely to continue.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".