Transfusion medicine education delivery in Rwanda: Adapting <i>Transfusion Camp</i> to a resource‐limited setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to few teaching faculty, resource-limited settings may lack the education curricula providers need for safe practice. As safe surgery becomes an increasing priority worldwide, it is essential to improve access to critical education content including in transfusion medicine. Transfusion Camp is a longitudinal curriculum, shown to increase knowledge in postgraduate trainees. The objective was to develop a sustainable bilateral partnership between Rwanda and Canada, and to integrate Transfusion Camp into the existing curriculum of the School of Medicine and Pharmacy at University of Rwanda. METHODS: A Transfusion Camp pilot course was initiated through collaboration of experts in Rwanda and Canada. Planning occurred over 6 months via online and in-person meetings. Canadian teaching faculty adapted course content via iterative discussion with Rwandan faculty. Final content was delivered through online pre-recorded lectures by Canadian Faculty, and in-person small-group seminars by Rwandan Faculty. Project feasibility was assessed through structured evaluation and informal debriefing. RESULTS: Twenty-seven postgraduate trainees were present for the pilot course, of whom 21 (78%) submitted evaluation forms. While the structure and content of the adapted Transfusion Camp curriculum were well-received, the majority of respondents indicated a preference for in-person rather than pre-recorded lectures. Debriefing determined that future courses should focus on continuing education initiatives aimed at physicians entering or already in independent practice. CONCLUSION: A partnership between universities and blood operators in high-resource and resource-limited countries results in a transfusion medicine curriculum that is locally applicable, multidisciplinary, and supportive of learning benefitting the learners and educators alike.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".