Making thawed universal donor plasma available rapidly for massively bleeding trauma patients: experience from the Pragmatic, Randomized Optimal Platelets and Plasma Ratios (PROPPR) trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Pragmatic, Randomized Optimal Platelets and Plasma Ratios (PROPPR) trial was a randomized clinical trial comparing survival after transfusion of two different blood component ratios for emergency resuscitation of traumatic massive hemorrhage. Transfusion services supporting the study were expected to provide thawed plasma, platelets, and red blood cells within 10 minutes of request. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: At the 12 Level 1 trauma centers participating in PROPPR, blood components transfused and delivery times were tabulated, with a focus on universal donor (UD) plasma management. The adequacy of site plans was assessed by comparing the bedside blood availability times to study goals and the new American College of Surgeons guidelines. RESULTS: Eleven of 12 sites were able to consistently deliver 6 units of thawed UD plasma to their trauma-receiving unit within 10 minutes and 12 units in 20 minutes. Three sites used blood group A plasma instead of AB for massive transfusion without complications. Approximately 4700 units of plasma were given to the 680 patients enrolled in the trial. No site experienced shortages of AB plasma that limited enrollment. Two of 12 sites reported wastage of thawed AB plasma approaching 25% of AB plasma prepared. CONCLUSION: Delivering UD plasma to massively hemorrhaging patients was accomplished consistently and rapidly and without excessive wastage in high-volume trauma centers. The American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program guidelines for massive transfusion protocol UD plasma availability are practicable in large academic trauma centers. Use of group A plasma in trauma resuscitation needs further study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".