Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35987636›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2022

Machine learning-based prediction of fainting during blood donations using donor properties and weather data as features.

Susanne Suessner, Norbert Niklas, Ulrich Bodenhofer, Jens Meier

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Susanne Suessner *Red Cross Transfusion Service of Upper Austria, Krankenhausstraße 7, 4010, Linz, Austria.
Norbert Niklas *Red Cross Transfusion Service of Upper Austria, Krankenhausstraße 7, 4010, Linz, Austria.
Ulrich BodenhoferSchool of Informatics, Communications, and Media, University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria, Softwarepark 11, 4232, Hagenberg, Austria.
Jens MeierDepartment for Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Kepler University Clinic, Kepler University Linz, Krankenhausstraße 9, 4010, Linz, Austria. jens.meier@kepleruniklinikum.at.
Austrian Red Cross · ATKepler Universitätsklinikum · ATUniversity of Applied Sciences Upper Austria · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesFainting is a well-known side effect of blood donation. Such adverse experiences can diminish the return rate for further blood donations. Identifying factors associated with fainting could help prevent adverse incidents during blood donation. MATERIALS AND

methodsData of 85,040 blood donations from whole blood and apheresis donors within four consecutive years were included in this retrospective study. Seven different machine learning models (random forests, artificial neural networks, XGradient Boosting, AdaBoost, logistic regression, K nearest neighbors, and support vector machines) for predicting fainting during blood donation were established. The used features derived from the data obtained from the questionnaire every donor has to fill in before the donation and weather data of the day of the donation.

resultsOne thousand seven hundred fifteen fainting reactions were observed in 228 846 blood donations from 88,003 donors over a study period of 48 months. Similar values for all machine learning algorithms investigated for NPV, PPV, AUC, and F1-score were obtained. In general, NPV was above 0.996, whereas PPV was below 0.03. AUC and F1-score were close to 0.9 for all models. Essential features predicting fainting during blood donation were systolic and diastolic blood pressure and ambient temperature, humidity, and barometric pressure.

conclusionMachine-learning algorithms can establish prediction models of fainting in blood donors. These new tools can reduce adverse reactions during blood donation and improve donor safety and minimize negative associations relating to blood donation.

Indexed as

Blood DonorsSyncopeHumansMachine LearningRetrospective StudiesWeatherBlood donationDonor safetyFainting

Identifiers

PMID35987636
PMCPMC9392313
OpenAlexW4292415389

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.