Effects of ABO Matching of Platelet Transfusions in Critically Ill Children*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine if transfusing ABO compatible platelets has a greater effect on incremental change in platelet count as compared to ABO incompatible platelets in critically ill children. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a prospective, observational study. Transfusions were classified as either ABO compatible, major incompatibility, or minor incompatibility. The primary outcome was the incremental change in platelet count. Transfusion reactions were analyzed as a secondary outcome. SETTING: Eighty-two PICUs in 16 countries. PATIENTS: Children (3 d to 16 yr old) were enrolled if they received a platelet transfusion during one of the predefined screening weeks. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Five-hundred three children were enrolled and had complete ABO information for both donor and recipient, as well as laboratory data. Three-hundred forty-two (68%) received ABO-identical platelets, 133 (26%) received platelets with major incompatibility, and 28 (6%) received platelets with minor incompatibility. Age, weight, proportion with mechanical ventilation or underlying oncologic diagnosis did not differ between the groups. After adjustment for transfusion dose, there was no difference in the incremental change in platelet count between the groups; the median (interquartile range) change for ABO-identical transfusions was 28 × 10 cells/L (8-68 × 10 cells/L), for transfusions with major incompatibility 26 × 10 cells/L (7-74 × 10 cells/L), and for transfusions with minor incompatibility 54 × 10 cells/L (14-81 × 10 cells/L) (p = 0.37). No differences in count increment between the groups were noted for bleeding (p = 0.92) and nonbleeding patients (p = 0.29). There were also no differences observed between the groups for any transfusion reaction (p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: No differences were seen in the incremental change in platelet count nor in transfusion reactions when comparing major ABO incompatible platelet transfusions with ABO compatible transfusions in a large study of critically ill children. Studies in larger, prospectively enrolled cohorts should be performed to validate whether ABO matching for platelet transfusions in critically ill children is necessary.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".