Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38801065›Full record

ArticleTurkish journal of haematology : official journal of Turkish Society of Haematology2024

Turkish Hematologists’ Preferences for Related Donor Selection: Results of a Multicenter Survey

Sıdıka Gülkan Özkan, Ali Kimiaei, Ali Hakan Kaya, Mehmet Sezgin Pepeler, Hasan Atilla Özkan, Mutlu Arat

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Turkish journal of haematology : official journal of Turkish Society of Haematology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Sıdıka Gülkan ÖzkanBahçeşehir University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology, İstanbul, TürkiyeORCID 0000-0001-5917-8071
Ali KimiaeiBahçeşehir University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology, İstanbul, TürkiyeORCID 0000-0003-0845-9556
Ali Hakan KayaMaltepe University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology, İstanbul, TürkiyeORCID 0000-0002-6388-9658
Mehmet Sezgin PepelerAnkara Bilkent City Hospital, Clinic of Hematology, Ankara, TürkiyeORCID 0000-0002-2762-8573
Hasan Atilla ÖzkanBahçeşehir University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology, İstanbul, TürkiyeORCID 0000-0001-5590-972X
Mutlu Aratİstanbul Florence Nightingale Hospital Group, Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Unit, İstanbul, TürkiyeORCID 0000-0003-2039-8557

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is a widely utilized treatment for various hematological diseases. While selection criteria for unrelated donors are well established, there is a lack of consistency and standardization in the selection of related donors. This study investigated the current approach of hematologists to the selection of related donors at Turkish HSCT centers. The study employed a cross-sectional survey design, distributing a self-administered questionnaire to 95 adult and pediatric transplantation centers in Türkiye to investigate their approaches to related donor selection for allo-HSCT. The questionnaire collected data on various topics including the center’s experience in performing allo-HSCT, patient groups treated, number of allo-HSCT procedures conducted between 2015 and 2021, preferences for related donors, considerations in related donor selection (such as sex and past pregnancies), guidelines utilized for related donor selection, upper age limit for related donors, and the use of specialized advanced analyses for elderly donors. The response rate to the survey was 38.9%. Variability was observed across centers in terms of sex consideration and the impact of past pregnancies on related female donor rejection. Different guidelines were employed for related donor selection, with the European Bone Marrow Transplantation guidelines being the most commonly used. Regarding the upper age limit for related donors, 8.1% of centers accepted an upper age limit of 55 years, 48.7% preferred an upper age limit of 65 years, and 43.2% selected related donors aged 65 and above. The lack of standardized guidelines for related donor selection in HSCT centers leads to variability in criteria and potential risks. Collaboration among centers is essential to establish consensus and develop standardized protocols.

Indexed as

Donor SelectionHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHematologyHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesTissue DonorsTurkeyDonor selectionHematopoietic stem cell transplantationHSCTStandardized protocolsSurvey

Identifiers

PMID38801065
PMCPMC11589365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.