Platelet Transfusion Practices in Critically Ill Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Little is known about platelet transfusions in pediatric critical illness. We sought to describe the epidemiology, indications, and outcomes of platelet transfusions among critically ill children. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Multicenter (82 PICUs), international (16 countries) from September 2016 to April 2017. PATIENTS: Children ages 3 days to 16 years prescribed a platelet transfusion in the ICU during screening days. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Over 6 weeks, 16,934 patients were eligible, and 559 received at least one platelet transfusion (prevalence, 3.3%). The indications for transfusion included prophylaxis (67%), minor bleeding (21%), and major bleeding (12%). Thirty-four percent of prophylactic platelet transfusions were prescribed when the platelet count was greater than or equal to 50 × 10 cells/L. The median (interquartile range) change in platelet count post transfusion was 48 × 10 cells/L (17-82 × 10 cells/L) for major bleeding, 42 × 10 cells/L (16-80 × 10 cells/L) for prophylactic transfusions to meet a defined threshold, 38 × 10 cells/L (17-72 × 10 cells/L) for minor bleeding, and 25 × 10 cells/L (10-47 × 10 cells/L) for prophylaxis in patients at risk of bleeding from a device. Overall ICU mortality was 25% but varied from 18% to 35% based on indication for transfusion. Upon adjusted analysis, total administered platelet dose was independently associated with increased ICU mortality (odds ratio for each additional 1 mL/kg platelets transfused, 1.002; 95% CI, 1.001-1.003; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of platelet transfusions are given as prophylaxis to nonbleeding children, and significant variation in platelet thresholds exists. Studies are needed to clarify appropriate indications, with focus on prophylactic transfusions.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".