ArticleTransfusion2026
Glycemic control and blood product quality of Canadian blood donors with diabetes.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMany blood centers now accept donors with diabetes, provided their condition is "well-controlled". However, glycemic control is not routinely assessed at donation, and the impact of donor diabetes on blood product quality remains unclear. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsTo screen glycemic control, glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was measured in whole blood from 256 unique donors with either type 1 diabetes (T1D), type 2 diabetes (T2D), or without known diabetes. In parallel, routine quality control (QC) data were linked with donor metadata to assess the impact of donor diabetes on red cell concentrate (RCC) and apheresis platelet concentrate (PC) quality at the time of their expiry.
resultsNearly half of donors with diabetes had suboptimal glycemic control (HbA1c >7 %) at donation, including 57.1 % of donors with T1D and 43.4 % with T2D. RCC units from donors with T2D (n = 1,329) had higher hemolysis (p <.001) and a greater proportion exceeding the clinical threshold of 0.8 % hemolysis (p <.001). These differences were not observed with T1D (n = 46). Apheresis PC units from donors with T2D (n = 164) had lower expiry pH (p = .014), with a trend toward more units below the clinical cutoff of pH 6.4 (p = .059). Differences in both products were most pronounced in donors with T2D using both metformin and insulin.
conclusionMany donors with diabetes have suboptimal glycemic control, and RCC and PC from donors with T2D have reduced quality. The observed effects are modest, likely not driven by glycemic control alone, and do not support additional deferral criteria for donors with diabetes.
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.