ArticleJournal of clinical apheresis2025
Developing A Model to Predict Major Bleeding Among Hospitalized Patients Undergoing Therapeutic Plasma Exchange.
Article in Journal of clinical apheresis, 2025. 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.
- Hemostasis testing practices vary in patients with high bleeding risk undergoing therapeutic plasma exchange.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangueArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) can be associated with bleeding, there are currently no known strategies to reliably predict bleeding risk. This study developed a TPE bleeding risk prediction model for hospitalized patients. To develop the prediction model, we undertook a secondary analysis of public use files from the Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-III. First, we used a literature review to identify potential predictors. Second, we used Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations to impute variables with < 30% missing data. Third, we performed a 10-fold Cross-Validated Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator to optimize variable selection. Finally, we fitted a logistic regression model. The model identified 10 unique predictors and seven interactions. Among those with the highest odds ratios (OR) were the following: > 10 TPE procedures and antiplatelet agents (OR 3.26); nephrogenic systemic sclerosis (OR 3.15); and intensive care unit stay (OR 3.08). Among those with the lowest OR were the following: albumin-only TPE (OR 0.50); male sex (OR 0.82); and heart failure (OR 0.85). The model indicated an acceptable performance with a C-statistic of 0.71 (95% CI 0.699-0.717). A model to predict bleeding risk among hospitalized patients undergoing TPE identified key predictors and interactions. Although the model achieved acceptable performance, future studies are needed to validate and operationalize it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.