ArticleTransplantation and cellular therapy2026
Donor Source Selection in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: Practices and Perceptions Across 50 United States Transplant Centers.
Article in Transplantation and cellular therapy, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Donor selection for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) is increasingly complex. Transplant centers may benefit from better resources and support to identify and select the best source (related, unrelated, or cord blood). A large-scale quality improvement project gathered data about individual center donor selection practices to better understand center donor search and selection practices, processes, and perspectives to inform the development of resources to support centers. Qualitative data were obtained from interviews of transplant center staff in the United States (US). Eligible centers were US alloHCT transplant centers that performed at least 30 adult alloHCTs in 2022, according to data from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. Interviews (n = 96) were conducted with 156 participants from 50 US centers. Participants included physicians (n = 15), medical directors (n = 30), search/nurse coordinators (n = 84), HLA lab directors/staff (n = 11), and other staff (n = 16), including quality staff and advanced practice providers. Centers represented multiple geographic regions in the US. Interviews revealed diverse decision-making models, ranging from standardized algorithms to individualized approaches. Regardless of the approach to donor selection, centers consistently prioritize degree of HLA-match and donor age, but their relative importance varied by case. Centers reported increasing comfort with mismatched unrelated and haploidentical donors, influenced by clinical trial participation and institutional experience. Urgency, patient population, and logistical constraints often led to adaptation of selection strategies. Experience, intuition, and institutional norms shaped practices alongside evidence. Most centers desired more comprehensive, user-friendly decision-support tools. Despite shared goals, substantial variation in practice was observed. Donor source selection remains a complex, high-stakes process shaped by evolving evidence, operational realities, and human factors. While alloHCT transplant centers share a common goal of optimizing patient outcomes and expanding access, variation in practices reflects both the dynamic nature of the field and the influence of experience, preferences, and emotional weight. As strategies continue to shift, future efforts should focus on providing tailored, evidence-based tools and guidance that respect this diversity while promoting best practices to improve outcomes for all patients.
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.