ArticleVox sanguinis2026
Cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical assay to evaluate stored blood quality prior to transfusion.
Article 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.
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.
- Cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical assay to evaluate stored blood quality prior to transfusion.Vox sanguinis · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesUnsuccessful red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, necessitating unscheduled repeat transfusion, is common and costly. Several technologies have been developed to assess stored blood quality, but the potential cost-effectiveness of pretransfusion testing versus no testing to prevent unscheduled re-transfusion is unknown. MATERIALS AND
methodsProjected benefits and costs of implementing a hypothetical pretransfusion assay were evaluated using Markov models with 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. Chronic RBC transfusions were modelled at 1-month intervals over a 1-year time horizon, for 'simple' and 'complicated' (requiring antigen matching) cohorts. Model inputs included transfusion costs and quality-of-life weights. Cost-effectiveness was defined as incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) > 0, assuming willingness to pay <$50,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).
resultsThe Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reimbursement for a single-unit RBC transfusion was $970 ($853-$1313) and $2377 ($2057-$3317), respectively, for the simple and complicated cohorts. The hypothetical assay was priced at $100 ($38-$163) and was assumed to lower unscheduled re-transfusions by 30%, from 64% to 45% (40%-50%). Pretransfusion testing yielded 0.02 higher QALY (95% prediction interval [PI]: 0.01-0.02); annual per-patient cost savings of $269 (95% PI: $263-$276) and $3651 (95% PI: $3633-$3669), respectively, for the simple and complicated cohorts; and INMB of $1083 (95% PI: $985-$1180) and $4347 (95% PI: $4250-$4443).
conclusionAssessment of RBC quality by a hypothetical test prior to transfusion may reduce the incidence and associated costs of unscheduled re-transfusions and, with modelled assumptions, could be especially cost-effective for patients with complicated chronic transfusion requirements.
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.