Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41191354›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Perceived Value of Transfusion Access and Hospice Services Among Patients With Blood Cancers.

Hari S Raman, Angel M Cronin, Scott F Huntington, Hajime Uno, Caitlin Brennan, Susan Lysaght Hurley, Anna Tidswell, Richard M Kaufman, Sarah M Lanahan, Kimberly S Johnson and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

13 authors.

Hari S RamanDivision of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Angel M CroninDivision of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Scott F HuntingtonYale Cancer Center, New Haven, Connecticut.
Hajime UnoDivision of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Caitlin BrennanCare Dimensions Inc, Boston, Massachusetts.
Susan Lysaght HurleyCare Dimensions Inc, Boston, Massachusetts.
Anna TidswellDivision of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Richard M KaufmanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth, New Hampshire.
Sarah M LanahanTransfusion Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kimberly S JohnsonDivision of Geriatrics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
James A TulskyDepartment of Supportive Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Gregory A AbelDivision of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Oreofe O OdejideDivision of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Although patients with blood cancers have the lowest rates of hospice use in oncology, there are sparse data regarding their perceptions of the services that hospice can provide. Lack of transfusion access in hospice has been posited as a key barrier to enrollment; however, data are limited regarding patients' assessment of the importance of transfusions compared with routine hospice services. Objective: To examine the importance that patients with blood cancers who are potentially hospice eligible place on access to transfusions compared with routine hospice services. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, cross-sectional survey study using a best-worst scaling instrument was conducted from October 1, 2020, to November 1, 2022, at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (Boston, Massachusetts) and the Yale Cancer Center (New Haven, Connecticut). Adult patients (aged 18 years or older) diagnosed with blood cancers who had a physician-estimated life expectancy of 6 months or less were included. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the importance that patients placed on routine hospice services (eg, visiting nurse) and nonroutine services (eg, transfusion access) using a best-worst scaling instrument. A hierarchical bayesian multinominal logistic regression of participants' responses was fit to assess the mean standardized importance score (SIS) for each service. Results: Among 331 eligible patients, 200 completed the survey (median age, 70.0 years [IQR, 62.5-76.0 years]; 133 [66.5%] male), with a response rate of 60.4%. The most common diagnosis was leukemia (73 [36.5%]). Transfusion access was considered the most important service (mean SIS, 20.53 [95% CI, 19.42-21.63]), followed by telemedicine (mean SIS, 18.45 [95% CI, 17.33-19.57]). The 3 least important services reported were peer support (mean SIS, 5.06 [95% CI, 4.10-6.02]), social work (mean SIS, 4.35 [95% CI, 3.53-5.16]), and chaplaincy (mean SIS, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.21-2.39]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of patients with blood cancers who were potentially hospice eligible, access to blood transfusions had the highest importance relative to routine hospice services. The high value placed on transfusion access suggests that this factor plays a crucial role in hospice decision-making and argues that innovative hospice models that incorporate access to palliative transfusions may increase hospice use and improve end-of-life care for this patient population.

Indexed as

Blood TransfusionHealth Services AccessibilityHematologic NeoplasmsHospice CareAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID41191354
PMCPMC12590303

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.