ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
The Effect of Heterogeneous Definitions of Massive Transfusion on Using Blood Component Thresholds to Predict Futility in Severely Bleeding Trauma Patients.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Balanced Component and Whole-Blood Transfusion Practices in US Trauma Centers.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- The ethics of blood stewardship and quantitative futility assessments to predict certain death in neurotrauma patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the trauma resuscitation literature, there are inconsistent definitions of what constitutes massive transfusion and a unit of blood, complicating the use of transfusion cut-points to declare futility. This is problematic as it can lead to the inefficient use of blood products, further exacerbating current blood product shortages. Previous studies have used various transfusion cut-points per hour to define futility in retrospective analyses but have not accurately defined futility at the bedside due to patient survival even at large rates and volumes of blood transfused. In an attempt to use transfusion cut-points as a marker to help define futility, guidelines have been proposed to limit blood product waste in transfusions for severely bleeding trauma patients, such as Suspension of Transfusion and Other Procedures (STOP) for patients older than 15 and the Futility of Resuscitation Measure (FoRM), used to determine futility in patients older than 60. In an effort to construct effective bedside futile resuscitation criteria with 100% positive predictive value and specificity, this review proposes the use of specific blood component transfusion cut-points combined with parameters from both STOP and FoRM to allow for a comprehensive and accurate method of declaring futility in severely bleeding trauma patients.
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.