Characterization of transfusion‐relevant bacteria reference strains in a lyophilized format
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Blood safety measures used by blood establishments to increase blood component safety can be validated using Transfusion-Relevant Bacterial Reference Strains (TRBRS). Ultra-cold storage conditions and manual preparation of the current TRBRS may restrict their practical use. To address this issue, the ISBT Transfusion-Transmitted Infectious Diseases Working Party's Bacterial Subgroup organized an international study to validate TRBRS in a user-friendly, lyophilised format. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two bacterial strains Klebsiella pneumoniae PEI-B-P-08 and Staphylococcus aureus PEI-B-P-63 were manufactured as lyophilised material. The lyophilised bacteria were distributed to 11 different labs worldwide to assess the robustness for enumeration, identification and determination of growth kinetics in platelet concentrates (PCs). RESULTS: Production of lyophilised TRBRS had no impact on the growth properties compared with the traditional format. The new format allows a direct low-quantity spiking of approximately 30 bacteria in PCs for transfusion-relevant experiments. In addition, the lyophilised bacteria exhibit long-term stability across a broad temperature range and can even be directly rehydrated in PCs without losing viability. Interlaboratory comparative study demonstrated the robustness of the new format as 100% of spiked PC exhibited growth. CONCLUSION: Lyophilised TRBRS provide a user-friendly material for transfusion-related studies. TRBRS in the new format have improved features that may lead to a more frequent use in the quality control of transfusion-related safety measures in the future.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".