Intraoperative Blood Transfusions: Identifying Stakeholder Interests
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Close to one million red blood cell (RBC) units are transfused annually in Canadian hospitals, with surgical inpatients accounting for up to 44% of transfusions. There is evidence of significant variation in transfusion practice in the operating room (i.e., intraoperative). Although variation is expected based on disease severity and patient preference, inappropriate clinical care due to either under- or over-transfusion likely also contributes to significant variation. Indeed, estimates of unwarranted intraoperative RBC transfusions in the literature range from 19% to 49%, owing partly to a lack of evidence-based consensus on RBC transfusion practice in the OR. Our two systematic reviews have highlighted this gap, demonstrating a lack of evidence from trials or actionable clinical practice guidelines to inform decisions in the OR. Perhaps more importantly, avoidance of blood product exposure is an important patient-prioritized outcome that has yet to be studied empirically in the OR. As such, the observed variation in transfusion practice suggests that transfusion decision-making during surgery represents a clear and important knowledge and evidence gap. Transfusion decision-making in the OR is a complex and dynamic process that we cannot begin to improve without first understanding it. It is influenced by 1) physiologic parameters such as acute blood loss, the effects of general anesthesia, and surgical manipulation. Decision-making is also likely heavily influenced by 2) behavioural factors in the OR (heuristics, team dynamics, institutional culture), for which very little empirical work has been conducted. Finally, the importance of 3) patient input in influencing transfusion decisions is inadequately studied, given the documented disconnect between patient priorities and outcomes used in the medical literature and by clinicians. In this context, the aim of my thesis was to develop an empirical understanding of transfusion decision-making in the OR based on stakeholder perceptions and priorities, informed by an integrated patient engagement process. With this work, I address an important knowledge gap in intraoperative blood transfusion, thereby contributing to efforts to reduce variation in blood transfusion practice in surgery. It is my hope that this work will be influential in informing actionable perioperative tools to optimize blood management including providing both evidence and knowledge gaps for future research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,040 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle