ArticleTransfusion2026
Directed donations for unvaccinated blood: A departure from evidence-based medicine associated with clinical harm, resource waste, and oversight gaps in a two-year single-center series.
Article in Transfusion, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesRequests for "unvaccinated" blood have been discouraged by professional and regulatory bodies because they lack scientific support and may negatively impact patient care. We describe a single-center series in which patients or surrogates refused standard blood components unless sourced from directed donors perceived to be "unvaccinated." MATERIALS AND
methodsWe performed a retrospective review of directed donations received at Vanderbilt University Medical Center between January 1, 2024 and December 31, 2025. Data included demographics, clinical scenario, component details, and documented operational or clinical consequences.
resultsDirected donor units were received for 15 patients; 13 of these patients were transfused at least one unit (n = 31 directed components: 22 red blood cell [RBC] units, 5 platelet units, 2 plasma units, 2 cryoprecipitate units). Median age was 17 years (range 0.33-73); nine patients were pediatric (<18 years). An ethics consultation was documented for one case, and a transfusion medicine consultation was documented for one case. Seven patients (47%) had at least one directed unit that was not transfused to them. Two patients clinically deteriorated in the setting of refusal of standard components, one of which also received a transfusion that deviated from institutional transfusion guidelines to avoid outdating, and two additional patients had surgical delay/cancellation with rescheduling associated with directed component availability.
conclusionIn this series, all directed units were from "unvaccinated" donors. These requests were associated with care delays, escalation, and inefficiencies. Health systems should implement standardized counseling, documentation, and escalation pathways consistent with existing guidance.
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.