Revisiting transfusion practices in critically ill patients*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to characterize contemporary red cell transfusion practice in the critically ill and to examine changes in practice over time. STUDY DESIGN: The authors conducted a scenario-based national survey. STUDY POPULATION: This study consisted of Canadian critical care practitioners. OUTCOME MEASURE: The authors evaluated transfusion thresholds in four hypothetical scenarios. RESULTS: Of 343 eligible Canadian critical care physicians, 235 (68.5%) responded to the survey. Most respondents were general internists (57%) who had been in practice for an average of 11.1 (+/-7.1) yrs and worked most often in combined medical/surgical intensive care units. Transfusion thresholds differed significantly among the four scenarios (p < .0001). The proportion of respondents adopting a threshold of 70 g/L was 63% and 70% in the hypothetical scenarios of trauma and septic shock compared with 16% and 3% who adopted the same threshold for scenarios involving patients with stable gastrointestinal hemorrhage and postoperative myocardial infarction, respectively. Fifteen percent of respondents identified transfusion thresholds exceeding 100 g/L for the postoperative myocardial infarction scenario, and 7% identified this threshold for the gastrointestinal hemorrhage scenario. Only 0.4% of respondents adopted a 100-g/L threshold for the two remaining scenarios. There was a significant decrease in transfusion thresholds in all four scenarios (p < .001) since the administration of a previous survey in 1993. The reported use of single-unit transfusions was 56% in 2002 vs. 10% in 1993. Eighty-five percent of physicians stated that they had modified their approach to transfusion, primarily in response to the publication of a major Canadian clinical trial and institutional guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian physicians appear to have adopted lower transfusion triggers and an increase in the use of single-unit red cell transfusion.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".