Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40172226›Full record

ArticleTransfusion2025

Transfusion probability as an alternative measure of lab-guided medical decision-making.

Malcolm Risk, Jeannie Callum, Kevin Trentino, Kevin Murray, Lili Zhao, Xu Shi, Amol Verma, Fahad Razak, Sheharyar Raza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transfusion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
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

9 authors.

Malcolm RiskDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Jeannie CallumDepartment of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, Kingston Health Sciences Centre and Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Kevin TrentinoUWA Medical School, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8768-9263
Kevin MurraySchool of Population and Global Health, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Lili ZhaoDepartment of Preventive Medicine (Biostatistics and Informatics), Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA.
Xu ShiDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Amol VermaInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Fahad RazakInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sheharyar RazaDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

Canadian Blood Services
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe clinical decision to transfuse is strongly influenced by laboratory results. Analysis of transfusion decision-making through pre-transfusion laboratory results (e.g. pre-transfusion hemoglobin) is a common yet misleading approach to studying transfusion practice. STUDY DESIGN AND

methodsWe introduce "Transfusion Probability", an alternative method overcoming many limitations of pre-transfusion lab result analyses. Under this approach, we estimate the probability of transfusion after results at a specific value (e.g. hemoglobin 7.4 g/dL) or in a range of values (e.g. 7.0-7.9 g/dL) using the proportion of tests followed by transfusion. We provide a comprehensive methodology for causal inference on the effect of patient characteristics and other variables of interest.

resultsAnalyses using pre-transfusion and transfusion probability were compared through a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients (N = 525,032). We found red blood cell transfusion probabilities of 76.2% in the 6.0-6.9 g/dL, 18.9% in the 7.0-7.9 g/dL, and 4.5% in the 8.0-8.9 g/dL hemoglobin ranges. After confounder adjustment, gastrointestinal bleeding patients were more likely to be transfused, with risk differences ranging from 6.6% in the 8.0-8.9 g/dL range to 13.8% in the 6.0-6.9 g/dL range. Pre-transfusion hemoglobin results showed minimal differences between gastrointestinal bleeding patients and other patients in unadjusted (0.00 g/dL) and adjusted analyses (-0.03 g/dL). DISCUSSION: In contrast to pre-transfusion result analysis, transfusion probability offers a nuanced account of transfusion practice and natural comparisons between patient groups. Wider use of our approach can provide actionable insights for clinical decision-making.

Indexed as

Blood TransfusionClinical Decision-MakingErythrocyte TransfusionAgedFemaleHemoglobinsHumansMaleMiddle AgedProbabilityRetrospective StudiesHemoglobinspre‐transfusion hemoglobinred cell transfusionretrospective studytransfusion probabilitytransfusion threshold

Identifiers

PMID40172226
PMCPMC12088312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.