Association between plasma transfusions and clinical outcome in critically ill children: a prospective observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Plasma transfusions are commonly used in adult and paediatric intensive care units. Recent data suggest an association between plasma transfusions and worse clinical outcome in adult trauma patients. To date, no prospective paediatric study has addressed this issue. Our objective was to prospectively analyse the association between plasma transfusions and clinical outcome of critically ill children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective, observational and single centre study that includes all consecutive admissions to a tertiary level multidisciplinary paediatric critical care unit over a 1-year period. The primary outcome measure was the incidence after transfusion of new or progressive multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Secondary outcome measures included nosocomial infections, intensive care unit length of stay and 28-day mortality. Odds ratios were adjusted for weight, severity of illness, coagulopathy, plasma transfusions prior to admission, need for extracorporeal life support and transfusion of other labile blood products. RESULTS: A total of 831 patients were enrolled, among which 94 (11%) received at least one plasma transfusion. In the latter group of patients, the adjusted odds ratio for an increased incidence of new or progressive multiple organ dysfunction syndrome was 3.2 (P = 0.002). There was also a significant difference in the occurrence of nosocomial infections and intensive care unit length of stay, but no significant difference in the 28-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill children, plasma transfusions seem to be independently associated with an increased occurrence of new or progressive multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, nosocomial infections and prolonged length of stay.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".