MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7009168168

Effectiveness leukoreduction in neonates

2002· dissertation· en· W7009168168 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2002
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeukoreductionHuman bloodBlood lossNeonatal mortality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As of September 1999, all donated units of blood in Canada undergo a process known as pre-storage leukoreduction. This process removes a significant proportion of white blood cells from blood at the time of donation. The decision to implement universal leukoreduction was based on fairly strong evidence that leukoreduction was beneficial in some adult populations such as cardiac and colorectal surgical patients. However, very little information exists on its effectiveness in other populations such as the neonatal population. The purpose of this thesis was three fold: (1) to conduct a systematic review of the literature to assess the effectiveness of leukoreduction; (2) to undertake a methods paper outlining the optimal design to study the effectiveness of leukoreduction given its universal nature; and (3) to conduct a study assessing the effectiveness of leukoreduction in the neonatal population. The results of the systematic review elucidate the paucity of well-conducted, methodologically sound studies evaluating the effectiveness of leukoreduction in the neonatal population. The current evidence suggests that leukoreduction may be effective. However, further studies are needed especially with respect to clinically important outcomes. The lack of convincing data and the significant cost of leukoreduction mandate evaluations to determine its clinical and economic impact. The methods manuscript describes important methodological issues confronted in the design of the before/after evaluation. Because of the universal application of many transfusion interventions, one has to consider, carefully, the methodological rigor with which these interventions are evaluated. The methodological considerations discussed are: (1) threats to internal validity; (2) precision; and (3) generalizability. Properly conceived, designed, conducted, and analyzed, such a before/after study design can yield informative associations. The final paper presents the results of the before/after study. The study included a total of 515 infants <1250 grams from three sites across Canada. The effect of leukoreduction on our primary outcome of nosocomial bacteremia was an odds ratio of 0.59 (95%CI: 0.34--1.01). Crude and adjusted rates for all major neonatal morbidities suggest that leukoreduction improved all outcomes. The adjusted odds ratio for a composite measure of any major neonatal morbidity was 0.31 (95%CI: 0.17--.56). Based on the results of this study, it is concluded that the implementation of universal prestorage leukoreduction significantly improved clinical outcomes in premature infants requiring blood transfusions.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicBlood transfusion and management→French-language works237,207→