MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387931805 · doi:10.1111/trf.17564

E‐learning in transfusion medicine: A scoping review

2023· review· en· W4387931805 on OpenAlexaffabout
Arwa Z. Al‐Riyami, Jana Vanden Broeck, Naomi Rahimi‐Levene, Soumya Das, Ben Saxon, Yulia Lin, Simon Stanworth

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBlood donation and transfusion practices
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfusion medicineUniversity hospitalMedicineBlood transfusionFamily medicineLibrary scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

YL works for the Canadian Blood Services and Octapharma on research grounds. She serves as a consultant for Choosing Wisely Canada. AZA, JVB, NR-L, SD, BS, and SJS have disclosed no conflicts of interest. Supplementary Material S1. Protocol of the scoping review and search strategy. Supplementary Material S2. Kirkpatrick model framework for evaluating learning outcomes. Supplementary Material S3. Details of the included studies. Supplementary Material S4. Summary of findings and gaps in e-learning for transfusion medicine education. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0230.025
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransfusionSame topicBlood donation and transfusion practicesFrench-language works237,207