MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281631609 · doi:10.3233/shti220142

Using Interactive Visual Analytics to Optimize Blood Products Inventory at a Blood Bank

2022· article· en· W4281631609 on OpenAlexafffund
Jaber Rad, J. G. Quinn, Calvino Cheng, Robert Liwski, Samina Abidi, Syed Sibte Raza Abidi

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Blood Services
KeywordsDashboardAuditAnalyticsComputer scienceBlood productProduct (mathematics)VisualizationInventory managementBlood transfusionProcess managementOperations managementDatabaseBusinessMedicineData miningEngineeringAccountingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blood products and their derivatives are perishable commodities that require an efficient inventory management to ensure both a low wastage rate and a high product availability rate. To optimize blood product inventory, Blood Transfusion Services (BTS) need to reduce wastage by avoiding outdates and improving availability of different blood products. We took a blood product lifecycle approach and used advanced visualization techniques to design and develop a highly interactive web-based dashboard to audit retrospective data and consequently, to identify and learn from procedural inefficiencies based on analysis of transactional data. We present pertinent scenarios to show how the blood transfusion staff can use the dashboard to investigate blood product lifecycles so as to probe transition sequence patterns that led to wastage as a means to discover causes of procedural inefficiencies in the BTS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207