ArticleDigital health
Development of blood demand prediction model using artificial intelligence based on national public big data.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI and Blood Banking: Predicting Transfusion Demand - A Systematic Review of Forecasting Approaches.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2026Review
- Reducing blood component wastage through targeted interventions: A four-year retrospective study at a Saudi tertiary hospital.Transfusion medicine (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Machine Learning-Based Algorithm for Tacrolimus Dose Optimization in Hospitalized Kidney Transplant Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Blood bank trends in Kuwait: five-year analysis of donations and investigations.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- AI Applications in Transfusion Medicine: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions.Acta haematologica · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Modern healthcare systems face challenges related to the stable and sufficient blood supply of blood due to shortages. This study aimed to predict the monthly blood transfusion requirements in medical institutions using an artificial intelligence model based on national open big data related to transfusion. Methods: Data regarding blood types and components in Korea from January 2010 to December 2021 were obtained from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service and Statistics Korea. The data were collected from a single medical institution. Using the obtained information, predictive models were developed, including eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LGBM), and category boosting (CatBoost). An ensemble model was created using these three models. Results: The prediction performance of XGBoost, LGBM, and CatBoost demonstrated a mean absolute error ranging from 14.6657 for AB+ red blood cells (RBCs) to 84.0433 for A+ platelet concentrate (PC) and a root mean squared error ranging from 18.5374 for AB+ RBCs to 118.6245 for B+ PC. The error range was further improved by creating ensemble models, wherein the department requesting blood was the most influential parameter affecting transfusion prediction performance for different blood products and types. Except for the department, the features that affected the prediction performance varied for each product and blood type, including the number of RBC antibody screens, crossmatch, nationwide blood donations, and surgeries. Conclusion: Based on blood-related open big data, the developed blood-demand prediction algorithm can efficiently provide medical facilities with an appropriate volume of blood ahead of time.
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.