ArticleBlood research2016
Unrelated hematopoietic stem cell registry and the role of the Hematopoietic Stem Cell Bank.
Article in Blood research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Study on Hematopoietic Stem Cell Donation Volunteer Retention between Swab Sampling Approach and Blood Sampling Approach: Evidence from Shanghai, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Physical and Psychological Discomfort Experienced by Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Donors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Effect of Educational Program on Knowledge, Attitude, and Willingness of Nursing Students for Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Donation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe hematopoietic stem cell bank has been actively recruiting registrants since 1994. This study systematically reviews its operations and outcomes over the last 20 years.
methodsRetrospective data on a total of 47,711 registrants were reviewed. Relevant data were processed using PASW Statistics for Windows, version 18.0.
resultsAs of 2013, the Korean Network for Organ Sharing database contained 265,307 registrants. Of these, 49,037 (18%) registrants committed to hematopoietic cell donation from 1994 to 2013. Fifty-seven percent of the registrants were men, and 43% were women. The reasons for opting out of the registry included refusal to donate (70%), family refusal (28%), and others (2%). The donation willingness of registrants was significantly higher than those who refused to receive a mail to confirm their continued enrollment (χ(2)=6.103, P=0.013). The bank successfully coordinated a total of 512 donors among newly matched donors from 1995 to 2013, of which the bone marrow and peripheral blood stem cell accounted for 40.8% and 59.2% of the total donations, respectively.
conclusionOur recruitment activities focus on promoting voluntary registration and the importance of updating personal contact information. We expect that these data may be useful for diverse studies and demonstrate the positive impacts on the donation program.
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.