↓ Skip to main content

Red cell transfusions as an independent risk for mortality in critically ill children

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Intensive Care, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Red cell transfusions as an independent risk for mortality in critically ill children
Published in
Journal of Intensive Care, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40560-015-0122-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Surender Rajasekaran, Eric Kort, Richard Hackbarth, Alan T. Davis, Dominic Sanfilippo, Robert Fitzgerald, Sandra Zuiderveen, Akunne N. Ndika, Hilary Beauchamp, Anthony Olivero, Nabil Hassan

Abstract

Severity of illness is an important consideration in making the decision to transfuse as it is the sicker patient that often needs a red cell transfusion. Red blood cell (RBC) transfusions could potentially have direct effects and interact with presenting illness by contributing to pathologies such as multi-organ dysfunction and acute lung injury thus exerting a considerable impact on overall morbidity and mortality. In this study, we examine if transfusion is an independent predictor of mortality, or if outcomes are merely a result of the initial severity as predicted by Pediatric Risk of Mortality (PRISM) III, Pediatric Index of Mortality (PIM2), and day 1 Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction (PELOD) scores. A single center retrospective study was conducted using data from a prospectively maintained transfusion database and center-specific data at our pediatric ICU between January 2009 and December 2012. Multivariate regression was used to control for the effects of clinical findings, therapy, and severity scores, with mortality as the dependent variable. Likelihood ratios and area under the curve were used to test the fidelity of severity scores by comparing transfused vs. non-transfused patients. There were 4975 admissions that met entry criteria. In multivariate analysis, PRISM III scores and serum hemoglobin were significant predictors of transfusion (p < 0.05). Transfused and non-transfused subjects were distinctly disparate, so multivariate regression was used to control for differences. Severity scores, age, volume transfused, and vasoactive agents were significantly associated with mortality whereas hemoglobin was not. A substantial number of transfusions (45 %) occurred in the first 24 h, and patients transfused later (24-48 h) were more likely to die compared to this earlier time point. Likelihood ratio testing revealed statistically significant differences in severity scoring systems to predict mortality in transfused vs. non-transfused patients. This study suggests that RBC transfusion is an important risk factor that is statistically independent of severity. The timing of transfusions that related strongest to mortality remained outside the purview of severity scoring, as these happened beyond the timing of data collection for most scoring systems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 21%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 10 24%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 45%
Engineering 4 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 9 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 December 2019.
All research outputs
#2,932,736
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#145
of 514 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,870
of 393,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 514 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 393,726 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.