MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799934472 · doi:10.1111/trf.14611

Red blood cell specifications for patients with hemoglobinopathies: a systematic review and guideline

2018· review· en· W2799934472 on OpenAlex
Veerle Compernolle, Stella T. Chou, Susano Tanael, William Savage, Jo Howard, Cassandra D. Josephson, Isaac Odame, Christopher J. Hogan, Gregory A. Denomme, Nadine Shehata

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood groups and transfusion
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoCanadian Blood Services
FundersCanadian Blood Services
KeywordsMedicineThalassemiaABO blood group systemIntensive care medicineGuidelineRed blood cellTransfusion medicineDiseaseBlood transfusionBlood productHemoglobinopathyPediatricsInternal medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Red blood cell (RBC) transfusions remain essential in the treatment of patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) and β-thalassemia. Alloimmunization, a well-documented complication of transfusion, increases the risk of delayed hemolytic transfusion reactions, complicates crossmatching and identifying compatible units, and delays provision of transfusions. Guidance is required to optimize the RBC product administered to these patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: An international, multidisciplinary team conducted a systematic review and developed, following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, recommendations to assist treating physicians and transfusion specialists in their decision to select RBCs for these patients. RESULTS: Eighteen studies (17 clinical studies and one cost-effectiveness study) were included in the systematic review. The overall quality of the studies was very low. In total, 3696 patients were included: 1680 with β-thalassemia and 2016 with SCD. CONCLUSION: The panel recommends that ABO D CcEe K-matched RBCs are selected for individuals with SCD and β-thalassemia, even in the absence of alloantibodies, to reduce the risk of alloimmunization. In patients with SCD and β-thalassemia who have developed clinically significant alloantibodies, selection of RBCs antigen negative to the alloantibody is recommended, if feasible. In these patients, selection of more extended phenotype-matched RBCs will likely reduce the risk of further alloimmunization. However, given the limited availability of extended phenotype-matched units, attention should be given to ensure that a delay in transfusion does not adversely affect patient care.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.249 · 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