Healthcare professionals in the ‘tainted blood’ era in Canada: Their forgotten emotions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: During the 1970s and early 1980s, Canada's comprehensive care haemophilic programs were established. Newer therapies led to a rapid increase in quality of life and expected life span for persons with haemophilia (PWH). The outlook was bright. However, beginning in 1982, the appearance of HIV/AIDS transmitted by treatment products led to the 'tainted blood' era with its devastating impact on PWH, recently highlighted in the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation mini-series 'Unspeakable'. What has received less notice is how the healthcare professionals (HCP) managing these patients then were affected. AIM: To report the emotional effects of that era on HCPs. METHODS: In developing an oral history of haemophilic care in Canada we have interviewed 76 HCPs, the majority of whom had worked in haemophilic clinics during that era. During each interview, we asked the interviewee to reflect on what this did to haemophilic care and to him/herself. The interview responses were analysed. RESULTS: HCPs have been markedly affected by the events of the 1980s with feelings that persist more than 30 years later. Most related to the loss of so many of their patients and the inability to alter the rapidly changing course of events at the time. CONCLUSION: The 'tainted blood' era had persistent strong emotional effects on HCPs. They were helpless to stop or to mitigate the devastating epidemics. Wellness support programs were less well developed then. While the focus is in the Canadian context, we suggest that a parallel can be drawn within haemophilic communities in other countries.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".