Deformability based sorting of stored red blood cells reveals donor-dependent aging curves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A fundamental challenge in the transfusion of red blood cells (RBCs) is that a subset of donated RBC units may not provide optimal benefit to transfusion recipients. This variability stems from the inherent ability of donor RBCs to withstand the physical and chemical insults of cold storage, which ultimately dictate their survival in circulation. The loss of RBC deformability during cold storage is well-established and has been identified as a potential biomarker for the quality of donated RBCs. While RBC deformability has traditionally been indirectly inferred from rheological characteristics of the bulk suspension, there has been considerable interest in directly measuring the deformation of RBCs. Microfluidic technologies have enabled single cell measurement of RBC deformation but have not been able to consistently distinguish differences between RBCs between healthy donors. Using the microfluidic ratchet mechanism, we developed a method to sensitively and consistently analyze RBC deformability. We found that the aging curve of RBC deformability varies significantly across donors, but is consistent for each donor over multiple donations. Specifically, certain donors seem capable of providing RBCs that maintain their deformability during two weeks of cold storage in standard test tubes. The ability to distinguish between RBC units with different storage potential could provide a valuable opportunity to identify donors capable of providing RBCs that maintain their integrity, in order to reserve these units for sensitive transfusion recipients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".