ArticleTransfusion2015
Financial implications of RHD genotyping of pregnant women with a serologic weak D phenotype.
Article in Transfusion, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Misclassification of RhD variants among pregnant women: a systematic review.Journal of medicine and life · 2023Pooled it
- Weak D phenotype in transfusion medicine and obstetrics: Challenges and opportunities.World journal of experimental medicine · 2025Review
- DEL in China: the D antigen among serologic RhD-negative individuals.Journal of translational medicine · 2021Review
- Proceed with care: the "uncommon" serologic weak D phenotypes.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2021Article
- Article
- Transfusion support during childbirth for a woman with anti-U and theImmunohematology · 2021Article
- Modern Rhesus (Rh) typing in transfusion and pregnancy.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021Article
- It's time to phase out "serologic weak D phenotype" and resolve D types with RHD genotyping including weak D type 4.Transfusion · 2020Article
- Anti-D reagents should be chosen accordingly to the prevalence of D variants in the obstetric population.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018Article
- RHD alleles among pregnant women with serologic discrepant weak D phenotypes from a multiethnic population and risk of alloimmunization.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018Article
- Serological weak D phenotypes: a review and guidance for interpreting the RhD blood type using the RHD genotype.British journal of haematology · 2017Review
- [Genotyping of RhD-negative blood samples diagnosed by serological tests from patients waiting for kidney transplantation].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2017Article
- Anti-D Antibodies in Pregnant D Variant Antigen Carriers Initially Typed as RhD.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2016Article
- Molecular immunohaematology round table discussions at the AABB Annual Meeting, Anaheim 2015.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2016Article
- A model for integrating molecular-based testing in transfusion services.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2016Article
- Red cell alloimmunisation: incidence and prevention.The Lancet. Haematology · 2016Article
- Integration of red cell genotyping into the blood supply chain: a population-based study.The Lancet. Haematology · 2015Article
- High prevalence of serological weak D phenotype and preponderance of weak D type 4.0.1. genetic variant in a Nigerian population: implications for transfusion practice in a resource-limited setting.Hematology, transfusion and cell therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn, classically caused by maternal-fetal incompatibility of the Rh blood group D antigen, can be prevented by RhIG prophylaxis. While prophylactic practices for pregnant women with serologic weak D phenotypes vary widely, RHD genotyping could provide clear guidance for management. This analysis evaluated the financial implications of using RHD genotyping to guide RhIG prophylaxis among pregnant females. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsA Markov-based model was constructed to evaluate the costs of RHD genotyping for pregnant females with serologic weak D phenotypes to inform RhIG prophylaxis. Using a comparison strategy of managing these women conservatively as D-, direct medical costs were assessed over 10- and 20-year periods for a simulated population of US women. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to assess the robustness of conclusions.
resultsUsing base-case variables, RHD genotyping for pregnant women with serologic weak D phenotypes is expected to marginally reduce overall costs. RHD genotyping these patients, rather than conservatively managing them as D-, would be cost-saving when the cost of genotyping is below $256. Genotyping would decrease net costs among non-Hispanic Caucasian females (-$0.17/pregnancy), but would increase costs among non-Hispanic African Americans (+$0.51/pregnancy), non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaskans (+$0.10/pregnancy), and Hispanics (+$0.37/pregnancy). Incorporating RHD genotyping would not significantly impact costs among Asians and Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders.
conclusionsUsing RHD genotyping to guide RhIG prophylaxis among pregnant women with serologic weak D phenotypes may be clinically beneficial without increasing overall costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.