Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33920459›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Current Understanding of the Relationship between Blood Donor Variability and Blood Component Quality.

Narges Hadjesfandiari, Mona Khorshidfar, Dana V Devine

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Health promotion for blood donors: A scoping review.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. In Sickness and in Health: Erythrocyte Responses to Stress and Aging.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

3 authors.

Narges HadjesfandiariCanadian Blood Services Centre for Innovation, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada.
Mona KhorshidfarCentre for Blood Research, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada.
Dana V DevineCanadian Blood Services Centre for Innovation, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada.

Funding

Burroughs Wellcome Fund 1012479.01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While differences among donors has long challenged meeting quality standards for the production of blood components for transfusion, only recently has the molecular basis for many of these differences become understood. This review article will examine our current understanding of the molecular differences that impact the quality of red blood cells (RBC), platelets, and plasma components. Factors affecting RBC quality include cytoskeletal elements and membrane proteins associated with the oxidative response as well as known enzyme polymorphisms and hemoglobin variants. Donor age and health status may also be important. Platelet quality is impacted by variables that are less well understood, but that include platelet storage sensitive metabolic parameters, responsiveness to agonists accumulating in storage containers and factors affecting the maintenance of pH. An increased understanding of these variables can be used to improve the quality of blood components for transfusion by using donor management algorithms based on a donors individual molecular and genetic profile.

Indexed as

Blood DonorsBlood PlateletsBlood PreservationErythrocytesAge FactorsHumansblood donor variabilityblood product qualityblood transfusionplatelet transfusionred blood cell transfusion

Identifiers

PMID33920459
PMCPMC8069744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.