MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749573445 · doi:10.1002/jca.21577

How do people become plasma and platelet donors in a VNR context?

2017· article· en· W2749573445 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Apheresis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBlood donation and transfusion practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDonationApheresisMedicineContext (archaeology)TypologyBlood donorPlatelet-rich plasmaFamily medicinePlateletSurgeryImmunologyPolitical scienceLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The demand for therapeutic plasma-derived products poses a challenge to blood collection agencies (BCAs). In 2014-2015, the volume of plasma sent for fractionation met 17.7% of Quebec's needs for immunoglobulins. This article aims to offer an exploration of the paths blood donors follow in order to become plasma and platelet donors (PPDs). STUDY DESIGN AND METHOD: This analysis is based on semi-structured interviews with 50 PPDs in Quebec, Canada. Our analysis focused on the occurrence of events and the presence of contextual elements identified through: (1) factual data on PPDs; and (2) what PPDs identified as being an influence on their donation experience. This information was synthesized using a typology of trajectories. RESULTS: Six typical trajectories have been distinguished, first by the presence (19/50 respondents) or absence (31/50) of blood donation as a family tradition. Of the latter 31 donors, some pointed instead to inherited family values as having a significant influence on their commitment (11/31). Donors' careers were then distinguished as having started early (34) or late (16). Sub-types then appeared with the addition of other contextual elements, motivation profiles, and circumstances under which the conversion to apheresis donation occurred. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest the existence of diversified donor trajectories, and confirm the importance of conducting more in-depth analyses of the sequence of events occurring along PPDs career. BCAs should develop strategies carefully tailored to different potential clienteles if they wish to convert whole blood donors to apheresis donation, and also focus on recruiting and retaining young PPDs.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.276 · 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