Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deferring donors at higher risk for transfusion transmissible infections is an important part of ensuring blood safety. The deferral for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) was implemented in the 1980s in many countries, since they were identified as a high-risk group for AIDS/HIV. With the introduction of increasingly sensitive HIV antibody testing, augmented by nucleic acid testing, the window period for HIV infection-when a donor may be infectious but have negative test results-has shrunk dramatically. In Canada, this has led to progressively shorter deferral periods for gbMSM, decreasing from a permanent deferral for sex with another male since 1977 to a 5-year, 12-month, and eventually 3-month deferral period. These time-based deferrals maintained safety; however, they are seen as stigmatizing by many and still result in the deferral of sexually active gbMSM. More recently, several countries have moved to a donor screening approach based on assessing sexual risk behaviors in all donors. This article outlines research supporting changes in policy, current eligibility screening policies in several countries, and preliminary results postimplementation of new eligibility policies in Canada in September 2022.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".