ArticleTransfusion2023
Multi-institutional experience with COVID-19 convalescent plasma in children.
Article in Transfusion, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- COVID-19 convalescent plasma safety and efficacy analysis for biologics license application approval.Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2026Review
- The role of convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulins in the COVID-19 pandemic, including implications for future preparedness.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesConvalescent COVID-19 plasma (CCP) was developed and used worldwide as a treatment option by supplying passive immunity. Adult studies suggest administering high-titer CCP early in the disease course of patients who are expected to be antibody-negative; however, pediatric experience is limited. We created a multi-institutional registry to characterize pediatric patients (<18 years) who received CCP and to assess the safety of this intervention.
methodsA REDCap survey was distributed. The registry collected de-identified data including demographic information (age, gender, and underlying conditions), COVID-19 disease features and concurrent treatments, CCP transfusion and safety events, and therapy response.
resultsNinety-five children received CCP: 90 inpatients and 5 outpatients, with a median age of 10.2 years (range 0-17.9). They were predominantly Latino/Hispanic and White. The most frequent underlying medical conditions were chronic respiratory disease, immunosuppression, obesity, and genetic syndromes. CCP was primarily given as a treatment (95%) rather than prophylaxis (5%). Median total plasma dose administered and transfusion rates were 5.0 ml/kg and 2.6 ml/kg/h, respectively. The transfusions were well-tolerated, with 3 in 115 transfusions reporting mild reactions. No serious adverse events were reported. Severity scores decreased significantly 7 days after CCP transfusion or at discharge. Eighty-five patients (94.4%) survived to hospital discharge. All five outpatients survived to 60 days.
conclusionsCCP was found to be safe and well-tolerated in children. CCP was frequently given concurrently with other COVID-19-directed treatments with improvement in clinical severity scores ≥7 days after CCP, but efficacy could not be evaluated in this study.
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.