High prevalence of weak<scp>D</scp>type 42 in a large‐scale<scp><i>RHD</i></scp>genotyping program in the province of<scp>Quebec (Canada)</scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The determination of the RhD phenotype is crucial to avoid alloimmunization, especially in childbearing women. Following the 2015 recommendation from the Work Group on RHD Genotyping, a large-scale RHD genotyping program was implemented in the province of Quebec (Canada) and offered to women ≤45 years old with a serological weak D or discordant results. Since weak D type 42 was previously shown to be prevalent among French Canadians, genotyping for that variant was also performed. Our aim was to report the prevalence of the weak D alleles in the province of Quebec. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective study of 2105 women with serological weak D referred to Hema-Quebec's immunohematology reference laboratory (IRL) between June 2016 and May 2020 was conducted. Results from the serological tests performed by the referring hospital were compiled and RHD were genotyped. RESULTS: Most patients presented at least one serological result ≤2+ before being referred to Hema-Quebec. Weak D type 42 was the most prevalent variant, representing 17.5% (368/2105) of all individuals tested. Only 15.3% (323/2105) of patients were weak D type 1, 3.3% (69/2105) were type 2, and 8.6% (180/2105) were type 3. Weak D type 42 is highly expressed in regions with low immigration rate and known for their founder effect. CONCLUSION: Our RHD genotyping program allowed for a better management of weak D. The province of Quebec presents a unique RHD genotype distribution. We confirmed that weak D type 42 is associated with a founder effect found in Caucasian French Canadians.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".