SynthesisVox sanguinis2026
Diagnostic accuracy of reticulocyte haemoglobin content in detecting iron deficiency without anaemia in blood donors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Vox sanguinis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesIron deficiency without anaemia (IDWA) is a significant concern among blood donors. Reticulocyte haemoglobin content (RHC) has been increasingly investigated as an alternative biomarker to evaluate iron status, but its diagnostic performance remains unclear. We aim to assess the diagnostic accuracy of RHC for detecting iron deficiency in non-anaemic blood donors. MATERIALS AND
methodsPubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, trial registries and reference lists were searched. Study quality was assessed using the Revised Tool for Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2), and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LRs) and summary receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (SROC
resultsThirteen studies involving 5853 donors were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR (LR+) and negative LR (LR-) of RHC to evaluate iron deficiency compared to tests using ferritin, soluble transferrin receptor or a combination of parameters were 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-0.79), 0.85 (95% CI: 0.74-0.92), 4.84 (95% CI: 2.59-9.04) and 0.35 (95% CI: 0.25-0.48), respectively; the SROC
conclusionEvidence from this review is insufficient to support the widespread use of RHC as a standalone screening test for IDWA in blood donors. Further studies are needed to improve RHC-based screening strategies.
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.