ArticleVox sanguinis2026
Tracing the gaps: A global snapshot.
Article in Vox sanguinis, 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.
- Tracing the gaps: A global snapshot.Vox sanguinis · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesTraceability of blood components ensures patient safety, allowing bidirectional tracing of donors and recipients. Records must be kept for defined intervals and stored safely to ensure data integrity. Compliance must be regularly assessed, with clear accountability and actions for deficiencies. All transfusion staff must be trained in traceability to promote safe practices. The global survey aimed to identify the current status of blood components traceability. MATERIALS AND
methodsInternational Society of Blood Transfusion (ISBT) Working Party on Haemovigilance in collaboration with International Haemovigilance Network (IHN) and Serious Hazards of Transfusion (SHOT) conducted a global survey in traceability, built using Online Surveys by Jisc and distributed to the six World Health Organization (WHO) regions. Responses were analysed using Microsoft Excel.
resultsThere were 212 responses from 43 countries. In 201/212 (95%), a law or regulation for traceability was reported, and in 189/201 (94%) traceability was bidirectional. Retention periods for records were variable, with ≥30 years being the most common (117/195; 60%). The Ministry of Health (118/212; 56%) and/or regulatory bodies (189/212; 89%) were most often the responsible organizations for monitoring traceability. Training in traceability for transfusion staff was reported in 139/212 (66%). In 32/212 (17%), there was at least one recall where a donor or recipient could not be traced. Records stored in computers (28/212; 13%), hard copies (22/212; 10%) or both (132/212; 62%) were reported. Of those with legacy systems (84/160; 53%), 18 stated that these were not safely managed. A haemovigilance system or equivalent was reported in 171/212 (81%) responses. The main challenges identified were unavailability of information technology (139/212; 66%) and staffing issues (137/212; 65%).
conclusionThis survey highlights wide global variation of traceability practices and highlights critical risks requiring urgent action.
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.