Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31970796›Full record

Trial reportTransfusion2020

Elicitation of prior probability distributions for a proposed Bayesian randomized clinical trial of whole blood for trauma resuscitation.

Jan O Jansen, Henry Wang, John B Holcomb, John A Harvin, Joshua Richman, Elenir Avritscher, Shannon W Stephens, Van Thi Thanh Truong, Marisa B Marques, Stacia M DeSantis and 2 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Transfusion, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. INCEPT: The Intensive Care Platform Trial-Design and protocol.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Prior Elicitation for Use in Clinical Trial Design and Analysis: A Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Jan O JansenUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0000-0001-8863-4398
Henry WangUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-4738-0093
John B HolcombUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
John A HarvinUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Joshua RichmanUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
Elenir AvritscherUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Shannon W StephensUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
Van Thi Thanh TruongUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Marisa B MarquesUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
Stacia M DeSantisUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Jose-Miguel YamalUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Claudia PedrozaUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.

Funding

Convalescent Plasma to Limit Coronavirus Associated ComplicationsUL1TR003167 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI KARP, DANIEL D, MCPHERSON, DAVID D · 2019 to 2023
$45.3M
Institutional Career Development CoreKL2TR003168 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI MILLER, CHARLES C · 2019 to 2023
$4.9M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR003168NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR003167
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhole blood trauma resuscitation is conceptually appealing and increasingly used but lacks evidence. A randomized controlled trial is needed but challenging to design. A Bayesian approach might be more efficient and more interpretable than a conventional frequentist design. We report the results on an elicitation meeting to create prior probability distributions to help develop such a trial.

methodsIn-person expert elicitation meeting, based on Sheffield Elicitation Framework methodology. We used an interactive graphical tool to elicit the quantities of interest (24-hour mortality and certainty required). Two rounds were conducted, with an intervening discussion of deidentified responses. Individual responses were aggregated into probability distributions.

resultsFifteen experts participated. The pooled belief was that the median 24-hour mortality of trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock treated with component therapy (the current standard of care) was 19% (95% credible interval [CrI], 6%-45%), and the median 24-hour mortality of those treated with whole blood, 16% (95% CrI, 5%-39%). The pooled prior distribution for the relative risk had a median of 0.84 (95% CrI, 0.26-3.1), indicating that the expert group had a 64% prior belief that whole blood decreases 24-hour mortality compared to component therapy.

conclusionsExperts had moderately strong beliefs that whole blood reduces the 24-hour mortality of trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock. These data will assist with the design and planning of a Bayesian trial of whole blood resuscitation, which will help to answer a key question in contemporary transfusion practice.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremHumansResuscitationShock, HemorrhagicWounds and Injuries

Identifiers

PMID31970796
PMCPMC7079110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.