ArticleBiology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation2016
European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Centers with FACT-JACIE Accreditation Have Significantly Better Compliance with Related Donor Care Standards.
Article in Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Indications for haematopoietic cell transplantation for haematological diseases, solid tumours and immune disorders: current practice in Europe, 2022.Bone marrow transplantation · 2022Article
- Standardization and Accreditation in Haemopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation - an Asia Pacific Perspective.Blood cell therapy · 2021Article
- Indications for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for haematological diseases, solid tumours and immune disorders: current practice in Europe, 2019.Bone marrow transplantation · 2019Review
- Providing both autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT) may have a stronger impact on the outcome of autologous HSCT in adult patients than activity levels or implementation of JACIE at Belgian transplant centres.Bone marrow transplantation · 2019Article
- JACIE accreditation for blood and marrow transplantation: past, present and future directions of an international model for healthcare quality improvement.Bone marrow transplantation · 2017Article
- Sixty as the new forty: considerations on older related stem cell donors.Bone marrow transplantation · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 13 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Previous studies have identified healthcare practices that may place undue pressure on related donors (RDs) of hematopoietic cell products and an increase in serious adverse events associated with morbidities in this population. As a result, specific requirements to safeguard RD health have been introduced to Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy/The Joint Accreditation Committee ISCT and EBMT (FACT-JACIE) Standards, but the impact of accreditation on RD care has not previously been evaluated. A survey of transplant program directors of European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation member centers was conducted by the Donor Health and Safety Working Committee of the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research to test the hypothesis that RD care in FACT-JACIE accredited centers is more closely aligned with international consensus donor care recommendations than RD care delivered in centers without accreditation. Responses were received from 39% of 304 centers. Our results show that practice in accredited centers was much closer to recommended standards as compared with nonaccredited centers. Specifically, a higher percentage of accredited centers use eligibility criteria to assess RDs (93% versus 78%; P = .02), and a lower percentage have a single physician simultaneously responsible for an RD and their recipient (14% versus 35%; P = .008). In contrast, where regulatory standards do not exist, both accredited and nonaccredited centers fell short of accepted best practice. These results raise concerns that despite improvements in care, current practice can place undue pressure on donors and may increase the risk of donation-associated adverse events. We recommend measures to address these issues through enhancement of regulatory standards as well as national initiatives to standardize RD care.
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.