ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2026
Survey of practices around the measurement and replacement of calcium in paediatric major trauma.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 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.
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
backgroundIonised hypocalcaemia can worsen haemorrhage due to its role in clot formation, vascular tone and cardiac contractility. Current guidelines recommend maintaining normal ionised calcium levels in the bleeding trauma patient. However, guidance does not specify when to replace calcium, and for paediatric trauma, it is unclear when clinicians should measure or decide to replace calcium.
objectivesThis study aimed to survey the practices, protocols and opinions regarding the measurement and replacement of calcium in paediatric major trauma.
methodsA cross-sectional survey with single-stage voluntary and snowball sampling. Individual emergency departments (EDs) responded to questions on departmental practices, while individual clinicians provided opinions on the measurement and replacement of calcium based on a clinical vignette with two variations (a haemodynamically stable and a haemodynamically unstable). The survey was administered using Online Surveys V3 (JISC, 2025). Respondents were invited to participate through collaborative research networks.
resultsThere were responses from 67 individual EDs and 99 individual respondents from 19 different countries. Most EDs had a paediatric major haemorrhage protocol (61/67, 91.0%), but this did not include calcium for 16/67 (23.9%) of the EDs. The timing of calcium replacement was either not included or not specified in most protocols (44/67, 65.7%), with variations in when it should be replaced when specified.Opinions on considering calcium replacement before blood products were significantly different based on whether the patient in the vignette was clinically stable or unstable. Opinions on replacement doses of exogenous calcium were significantly different when the calcium was moderately low (<1.12 mmol/L), but were not significantly different if the calcium was severely low (<1.0 mmol/L).
conclusionThere is considerable variation among EDs regarding ionised calcium measurement and calcium replacement, both before blood product transfusion and in major haemorrhage protocols. Clinicians' opinions on calcium measurement and replacement also vary widely. More research is needed to reach a consensus. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
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.