Assessing the risk of transfusion-transmitted variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: a European perspective.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several countries have recently reassessed the international risk of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) transmission through transfusion of blood and blood components (red blood cells, platelets and plasma) and relaxed donor deferrals based on geographic and transfusion exposure in countries formerly considered to be high risk, such as the UK. In this regard, the European Blood Alliance organised a consensus meeting of experts and involved professionals to discuss current knowledge, epidemiological data, prevention and various methods for assessing the risk of transfusion-transmitted vCJD, as well as to develop an appropriate position on possible approaches to address these challenges in Europe. Participants reached a consensus that the current risk of transfusion-transmitted vCJD associated with blood donors who either travelled to or received transfusions in the UK during the vCJD outbreak is minimal. In addressing such risks, it would be pragmatic that assessments and guidelines are developed by European expert bodies, rather than individual assessments by Member States. Regardless of the approach used, European or national, a qualitative risk assessment based on a review and analysis of available data, considering all the uncertainties and experiences of other countries, would provide crucial information to reassess blood donation strategies regarding the transfusion-associated vCJD risk.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".