ArticleBJS open2025
Quality metrics for perioperative red blood cell transfusion in gastrointestinal cancer surgery: international Delphi consensus.
Article in BJS open, 2025. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPerioperative red blood cell transfusion (RBCT) in gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and higher healthcare costs. There are no standardized quality metrics to evaluate perioperative RBCT use. The aim of this study was to develop consensus-based quality metrics to assess and monitor perioperative RBCT in GI cancer surgery.
methodsA four-round Delphi process was conducted with 37 multidisciplinary international experts. After rating the importance of an initial list of possible metrics, panellists ranked them for priority and scored them for feasibility. Metrics were retained if rated as important and feasible. Consensus was defined as a median score between 4 and 5 and ≤ 22 panellists rating outside the score category containing the median.
resultsOf 72 candidate metrics, 18 were retained after prioritization and feasibility scoring: five process, five outcome, and eight structure metrics. Process metrics included rate of perioperative RBCT at 3 days stratified by intraoperative and postoperative timing, and rate of RBCTs administered with haemoglobin > 7 g/dl, in patients undergoing GI cancer surgery. Outcome metrics included 30-day major morbidity and mortality, transfusion reactions, and patient-reported outcomes in patients receiving perioperative RBCT. Structure metrics addressed access to an on-site blood bank and the availability of institutional protocols for massive transfusion, anticoagulation reversal, and indications for perioperative RBCT.
conclusionThrough an international Delphi consensus, quality metrics were identified to support the monitoring of perioperative RBCT for GI cancer surgery. These metrics are important for quality monitoring, including institutional audits and performance assessment, to reduce variation in the use of RBCT, improve outcomes, and optimize blood product utilization.
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.