ArticleTransfusion2026
Provider perceptions of indications for red blood cell transfusion.
Article in Transfusion, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Provider perceptions of indications for red blood cell transfusion.Transfusion · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundGuidelines for red blood cell transfusion recommend incorporating patient factors and clinical context beyond hemoglobin (Hb) levels. However, limited data exist on which factors clinicians consider important. Understanding these decision-making elements can clarify how guidelines are applied and inform future research. This study aimed to identify and prioritize factors that influence transfusion decisions among inpatient clinicians. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsInpatient clinicians who are high utilizers of transfusion were administered a survey and asked to rate the importance of 30 decision-making factors using a 3-point Likert scale (very, somewhat, not important). Additional questions addressed transfusion practices and anemia management using a 5-point Likert scale (very much disagree to very much agree). Descriptive statistics were used to characterize study participants and survey responses, and regression models explored associations between responses and participant characteristics.
resultsOf 95 eligible clinicians, 85 (89%) completed the survey. Only 7 of the 30 factors were rated as "very important" by more than 66% of respondents; 5 of these were Hb-related. Importance assigned to other non-Hb-related factors varied. Most clinicians (85%) do believe that anemia can result in significant adverse consequences. Most clinicians further believe that restrictive transfusion is standard of care (88%) and optimal (68%), but also that transfusion decisions need to incorporate factors other than a patient's Hb level (84%) at the same time.
conclusionDespite guidelines suggestions, there is a lack of consensus on what clinical factors beyond Hb clinicians believe are important in making transfusion decisions.
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.