MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412196760 · doi:10.1111/trf.18338

<scp>ABO</scp>‐mismatched platelet and plasma transfusion practices and the potential for transfusion‐related alpha‐gal syndrome: The Biomedical Excellence for Safer Transfusion Collaborative Study

2025· article· en· W4412196760 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy M. Dunbar, Richard M. Kaufman, Karina S. Bary, Gregory Bellairs, Claudia S. Cohn, Fanny Angelot‐Delettre, Stephanie Ditcham, Gustavo de Carvalho Duarte, Roberta Fachini, Chloë George, Catherine Humbrecht, Vernon Louw, Sascha Meier, Sarah L. Morley, Meridah Mwase, Nancy Robitaille, Kylie Rushford, Tomohiko Sato, Richard Schäfer, Julie Staves, Minoko Takanashi, Pierre Tiberghien, Silvano Wendel, Erica M. Wood, Alyssa Ziman, Michael Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood groups and transfusion
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineHéma-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsABO blood group systemMedicinePlateletGroup BAdverse effectPlatelet transfusionGroup ABlood productBlood transfusionInternal medicineAnesthesiaGastroenterologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alpha-gal syndrome (AGS) is caused by IgE antibodies against the alpha-gal oligosaccharide, which is structurally similar to the Group B antigen. Recent case reports of severe allergic transfusion reactions (ATRs) in Group O patients receiving Group B plasma and platelets raise the possibility of a new adverse event, herein called transfusion-related AGS (TRAGS). The primary goal of this study was to assess the frequency of Groups B and AB plasma and platelet transfusions to Group O patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this multi-site retrospective study, participating sites submitted the numbers of platelet and plasma transfusions administered during a 2-year period categorized by patient and product ABO group. RESULTS: Fourteen sites from 10 countries participated. Group O patients received Group AB for an average of 9.9% (range 2.8%-29.2%) of plasma transfusions and Group B for 3.2% (0%-12.8%). AB plasma transfusion to Group O patients represented 4.5% (0.9%-14.6%) of the total plasma transfused; Group B 1.4% (0%-5.1%). Group O patients received Group AB for an average of 1.5% (range 0%-5.9%) of platelet transfusions and Group B for 4.1% (0%-14.2%). AB platelet transfusion to Group O patients represented 0.6% (0%-2.7%) of the total platelets transfused; Group B platelets were 1.8% (0%-6.7%). DISCUSSION: Evidence supporting the possibility of a new adverse event, TRAGS, is accumulating. This study quantifies how often Group O patients may be exposed to Group B antigen in Group B or AB plasma and/or platelet transfusions, providing an estimate of the scope of potential risk for TRAGS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransfusionSame topicBlood groups and transfusionFrench-language works237,207