Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 294

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevention of transfusion-transmitted infections

Open access
Busch, Michael P., Bloch, Evan M., Kleinman, Steven·2019·Blood

Abstract

Since the 1970s, introduction of serological assays targeting virus-specific antibodies and antigens has been effective in identifying blood donations infected with the classic transfusion-transmitted infectious agents (TTIs; hepatitis B virus [HBV], HIV, human T-cell lymphotropic virus types I and II, hepatitis C virus [HCV]). Subsequently, progressive implementation of nucleic acid–amplification technology (NAT) screening for HIV, HCV, and HBV has reduced the residual risk of infectious-window-period donations, such that per unit risks are <1 in 1 000 000 in the United States, other high-income countries, and in high-incidence regions performing NAT. NAT screening has emerged as the preferred option for detection of newer TTIs including West Nile virus, Zika virus (ZIKV), and Babesia microti. Although there is continual need to monitor current risks due to established TTI, ongoing challenges in blood safety relate primarily to surveillance for emerging agents coupled with development of rapid response mechanisms when such agents are identified. Recent progress in development and implementation of pathogen-reduction technologies (PRTs) provide the opportunity for proactive rather than reactive response to blood-safety threats. Risk-based decision-making tools and cost-effectiveness models have proved useful to quantify infectious risks and place new interventions in context. However, as evidenced by the 2015 to 2017 ZIKV pandemic, a level of tolerable risk has yet to be defined in such a way that conflicting factors (eg, theoretical recipient risk, blood availability, cost, and commercial interests) can be reconciled. A unified approach to TTIs is needed, whereby novel tests and PRTs replace, rather than add to, existing interventions, thereby ameliorating cost and logistical burden to blood centers and hospitals.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1182/blood-2018-11-833996

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Metadata

Authors
Busch, M. P., Bloch, E. M., & Kleinman, S.
Venue
Blood
Published
2019-04-25
Volume
133
Issue
17
Pages
1854-1864
ISSN
  • 0006-4971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-0020
OpenAlex
W2915128108
Cited by
294
References
3
FWCI
59.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.