MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965678752 · doi:10.1002/jca.21738

Predictive factors for successful peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and collection in children

2019· article· en· W2965678752 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Apheresis · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersTerumo BCT
KeywordsMedicineApheresisCD34Peripheral bloodStem cellPeripheralInternal medicineSurgeryImmunologyPlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Factors affecting the success of peripheral blood stem cell collection (SCC) in children are not well characterized. We reviewed 218 stem cell collections among 199 pediatric donors, of which 35 were from healthy sibling donors and 164 were for autologous collections. Successful SCC, defined as a CD34 + cell count of ≥2 × 10 6 /kg of recipient weight per intended transplant, occurred in 188 of 199 donors (94%). Ideal SCC defined ≥5 × 10 6 CD34 + cells/kg of recipient per intended transplant, occurred in 147 (74%) patients. Failure of collection occurred in 11 (6%) patients and was significantly associated with an autologous collection for a brain tumor diagnosis ( P = .003) and a pre‐apheresis peripheral blood (PB) CD34 + count <20 × 10 6 cells/L ( P = .002). Ideal SCC was significantly associated with age < 10 years ( P = .01) and pre‐apheresis PB‐CD34 + count ≥20 × 10 6 cells/L ( P < .0001). Factors associated with failure of SCC may be identified in advance of the collection procedure allowing appropriate counselling of patients as well as anticipatory guidance for multiple collections or justify the preemptive use of stem cell mobilizing agents.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.296 · 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