ArticleBlood vessels, thrombosis & hemostasis2026
A multicenter analysis revisiting the PLASMIC score: performance limitations and the impact of age, MCV, and LDH.
Article in Blood vessels, thrombosis & hemostasis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Advances in rapid ADAMTS13 testing for thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura: a systematic review of diagnostic assays and the role of clinical probability tools.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Revisiting the PLASMIC score and the future of ADAMTS13 prediction.Blood vessels, thrombosis & hemostasis · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The PLASMIC score is widely used to guide early identification of immune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP), but some studies suggest decreased performance in different populations and low predictive yield of specific components. Refining rapid diagnosis of iTTP may improve outcomes. We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis of patients who underwent ADAMTS13 testing. We validated the PLASMIC score, evaluated the predictive performance of its individual components using multivariable logistic regression, and compared performance between 2 age groups (<60 and ≥60 years). We generated modified score variants by excluding low-yield components and/or incorporating lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). We included 482 patients (iTTP, n = 80; controls, n = 402). PLASMIC retained good performance (area under the curve [AUC], 0.854), but sensitivity declined with older age (83% vs 62%). Mean corpuscular volume (MCV) was the only PLASMIC component that lacked independent predictive value (odds ratio [OR], 1.1;
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.