MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W907346260

An analysis of a preoperative pediatric autologous blood donation program.

2000· article· en· W907346260 on OpenAlexaffabout
M Letts, R.-P. Perng, Brian Luke, Johnathan K Jarvis, Luke Lawton, Sèamus Hoey

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDonationAutologous bloodBlood transfusionIncidence (geometry)SurgeryRetrospective cohort studyPediatrics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of a pediatric autologous blood donation program. DESIGN: A retrospective study of patient charts and blood-bank records. SETTING: The Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, a tertiary care, pediatric centre. PATIENTS: One hundred and seventy-three children who received blood transfusions for a total of 182 procedures between June 1987 and June 1997. INTERVENTIONS: Autologous and homologous blood transfusion required for major surgical intervention, primarily spinal fusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgeons' accuracy in predicting the number of autologous blood units required for a given procedure, compliance rate (children's ability to donate the requested volume of blood), utilization rate of autologous units and rate of allogeneic transfusion. RESULTS: The surgeons' accuracy in predicting the number of autologous units required for a given procedure was 53.8%. The compliance rate of children to donate the requested amount of blood was 80.3%. In children below the standard age and weight criteria for blood donation the compliance rate was 75.5%. The utilization rate of autologous units obtained was 84.4% and the incidence of allogeneic transfusion was 26.6%. CONCLUSIONS: There was a high rate of compliance and utilization of predonated autologous blood in the children in the study. Preoperative blood donation programs are safe and effective in children, even in those below the standard age and weight criteria of 10 years and 40 kg.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations13
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicBlood transfusion and managementFrench-language works237,207