• 中国科学论文统计源期刊
  • 中国科技核心期刊
  • 美国化学文摘(CA)来源期刊
  • 日本科学技术振兴机构数据库(JST)

临床输血与检验 ›› 2026, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (4): 582-590.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-2587.2026.04.018

• 调查研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于大样本与机器学习的机采献血者血管迷走神经反应风险预测模型研究

冯慧慧1, 黄心洁2, 蔡斌1, 李迪峰1, 赵峻2   

  1. 1宁波市中心血站,浙江宁波 315010;
    2宁波大学,浙江宁波 315211
  • 收稿日期:2026-07-08 出版日期:2026-08-20 发布日期:2026-08-26
  • 通讯作者: 赵峻,主要从事统计分布理论、复杂数据处理方面研究,(E-mail)zhaojun1@nbu.edu.cn。
  • 作者简介:冯慧慧,主要从事血小板功能方面研究,(E-mail)249517853@qq.com。

A Large-sample Machine Learning-based Risk Prediction Model for Vasovagal Reaction in Apheresis Blood Donors

FENG Huihui1, HUANG Xinjie2, CAI Bin1, LI Difeng1, ZHAO Jun2   

  1. 1Ningbo Central Blood Station, Ningbo 315010;
    2Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211
  • Received:2026-07-08 Online:2026-08-20 Published:2026-08-26

摘要: 目的 构建机采献血者血管迷走神经反应(VVR)风险预测模型,为献血安全防控提供依据。方法 回顾性纳入2021—2025年宁波市中心血站58 031例机采血小板献血者资料,VVR阳性155例,阳性率0.27%。整合人口学、体检、血液学及采血参数,采用LASSO回归筛选特征,构建多元Logistic回归模型。数据集按7:3分层抽样分为训练集与测试集,结合五折交叉验证开展模型验证,评价指标包括AUC、准确率、敏感性等。结果 从29项变量中筛选出21个核心预测因子。训练集AUC为0.840,测试集AUC为0.800,准确率72.60%,敏感性68.09%,特异性72.61%,精确率0.67%,F1分数0.013 2。Logistic回归显示,采集量分组、血红蛋白、脉搏为独立危险因素;男性、血小板计数、多次机采献血史及体重为独立保护因素;体外循环血量及抗凝剂量虽呈现统计学保护效应,实则为VVR发生后提前终止采血造成的统计假象。结论 本模型判别效能与稳定性良好,依托采血前基线指标可实现VVR高危人群筛查,指导临床开展个体化干预,具备临床应用价值。

关键词: 机采献血者, 血管迷走神经反应, 预测模型, LASSO回归, 机器学习

Abstract: Objective To develop a risk prediction model for vasovagal reaction (VVR) in apheresis blood donors, thereby supporting evidence-based strategies for donor safety as well as adverse event prevention and control. Methods We retrospectively enrolled 58 031 apheresis platelet donors from Ningbo Central Blood Station (2021—2025), including 155 VVR cases with a positive rate of 0.27%. Demographic characteristics, physical examination findings, hematological indices and apheresis parameters were collected. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression was used for feature screening, and a multivariate logistic regression model was established. The dataset was divided into training and test sets at a 7:3 ratio by stratified sampling, with five-fold cross-validation for model verification. Model performance was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and other metrics. Results From 29 candidate variables, 21 core predictors were retained. The model achieved an AUC of 0.840 in the training set and 0.800 in the test set, with an accuracy of 72.60%, sensitivity of 68.09%, specificity of 72.61%, precision of 0.67%, and F1-score of 0.013 2. Logistic regression analysis identified apheresis volume grouping, hemoglobin level, and pulse rate as independent risk factors, whereas male sex, platelet count, history of multiple apheresis donations, and body weight were independent protective factors. Although extracorporeal circulation volume and anticoagulant dosage exhibited statistically protective effects, these were recognized as statistical artifacts arising from early termination of apheresis following VVR occurrence. Conclusion The proposed model displays good discriminative ability and stability. It could identify high-risk VVR candidates based on pre-collection baseline indicators before blood and facilitate individualized preventive interventions, supporting its clinical utility in blood donation settings.

Key words: Apheresis blood donors, Vasovagal reaction, Prediction model, LASSO regression, Machine learning

中图分类号: