Therapeutic impact of red blood cell transfusion on anemic outpatients: the RETRO study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer or other diagnoses associated with chronic anemia often receive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion as outpatients, but the effect of transfusion on functional status is not well demonstrated. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: To estimate the effect of transfusion on functional status and quality of life, we measured 6-minute walk test distance and fatigue- and dyspnea-related quality-of-life scores before and 1 week after RBC transfusion in 208 outpatients age ≥50 with at least one benign or malignant hematology/oncology diagnosis. To account for potential confounding effects of cancer treatment, patients were classified into two groups based on cancer treatment within 4 weeks of the study transfusion. Minimum clinically important improvements over baseline were 20 meters in walk test distance, 3 points in fatigue score, and 2 points in dyspnea score. RESULTS: The median improvement in unadjusted walk test distance was 20 meters overall and 30 meters in patients not receiving recent cancer treatment. Fatigue scores improved overall by a median of 3 points and by 4 points in patients without cancer treatment. There was no clinically important change in dyspnea scores. In multiple linear regression analysis, patients who maintained hemoglobin (Hb) levels of 8 g/dL or greater at 1 week posttransfusion, who had not received recent cancer treatment, and who did not require hospitalization during the study showed clinically important increases in mean walk test distance. CONCLUSIONS: Red blood cell transfusion is associated with a modest, but clinically important improvement in walk test distance and fatigue score outcomes in adult hematology/oncology outpatients.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".