International survey of strategies to mitigate t<scp>ransfusion‐transmitted</scp><i>Trypanosoma cruzi</i> in n<scp>on‐endemic</scp> countries, 2016–2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Chagas disease, caused by Trypanosoma cruzi, is endemic to Mexico, Central and South America. While initially limited to the Americas, emigration of infected persons triggered geographically broader blood safety challenges. To mitigate transfusion-transmitted Chagas (TTC), transfusion services implemented approaches including risk factor questions and serologic testing. We sought to understand and compare strategies in non-endemic countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Transfusion services in International Society of Blood Transfusion (ISBT)-affiliated organizations and members of the ISBT Working Party on Transfusion-Transmitted Infectious Diseases were invited to complete an online survey on T. cruzi mitigation strategies. The survey queried about cases of TTC, risk factors, testing methodology, educational materials, pathogen reduction, donor/product management, donor deferral and perceived public health concerns surrounding TTC. RESULTS: Responses were received from 27 institutions in 22 countries. Most countries (77.3%) reported no historical TTC cases, while 18.2% reported 1-5 cases and 4.5% reported 6-10 cases. Concern about Chagas among the general public and public health authorities was low, but 12 of 25 blood centres reported moderate/high concern. Overall, 17 countries mitigated for TTC: 15 used risk factor questions and 10tested for T. cruzi antibodies. Ten countries used pathogen reduction but not specifically to prevent TTC. CONCLUSION: While Chagas is rarely cited as a public health concern, blood centres in many non-endemic countries, including those outside the Americas, implemented measures to mitigate risk. Mitigation focussed on risk factors associated with Latin American immigrants and serologic testing. Thus, despite the rarity of TTC, many non-endemic countries continue to address it as an ongoing blood safety risk.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".