ArticleTransfusion2026
Next-generation blood products: Results of a survey on interest, indications, drivers, and barriers to adoption.
Article in Transfusion, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundNext generation blood products (NGBPs), specifically dried plasma/platelets/cryoprecipitate/fibrinogen concentrate, and frozen platelets, can alleviate the strain on the blood supply due to their advantages of ease of transport and storage, reduced overall cost, and decreased wastage. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsA working group within the Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies developed a survey to determine the level of interest, potential indications, drivers, and barriers to the implementation of these NGBPs.
resultsAmong the 125 respondents, familiarity with these products was low (57% dried plasma, 43% dried cryoprecipitate/fibrinogen concentrate, 38% frozen platelets, and 23% dried platelets). Respondents were most interested in dried plasma and least interested in dried cryoprecipitate/fibrinogen concentrate. The setting in which NGBPs would be used were the emergency room (71%), surgery (62%), when conventional products are unavailable (51%), pre-hospital (36%), obstetrics (30%), oncology (25%), and other (12%). The largest driver of interest in NGBPs is to reduce wastage, while the smallest is a reduction in cold chain requirements. The largest perceived barrier to onboarding NGBPs is cost, while the smallest is inventory management. Most respondents were not willing to pay the same cost as they would for conventional products (51%). The majority (85%) of respondents believe the products would be adjuncts. DISCUSSION: The low familiarity with NGBPs is likely due to the lack of broad regulatory licensing of these products. Cost, clinical value, and health economic considerations will be key to implementing these products.
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.