Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 632

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 97 of the 97 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patient Blood Management: Recommendations From the 2018 Frankfurt Consensus Conference

Mueller, Markus M., Van Remoortel, Hans, Meybohm, Patrick, Aranko, Kari, Aubron, Cécile, Burger, Reinhard, Carson, Jeffrey L., Cichutek, Klaus, De Buck, Emmy, Devine, Dana, Fergusson, Dean, Folléa, Gilles, French, Craig, Frey, Kathrine P., Gammon, Richard, Levy, Jerrold H., Murphy, Michael F., Ozier, Yves, Pavenski, Katerina, So-Osman, Cynthia, Tiberghien, Pierre, Volmink, Jimmy, Waters, Jonathan H., Wood, Erica M., Seifried, Erhard, for the ICC PBM Frankfurt 2018 Group·2019·JAMA

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Blood transfusion is one of the most frequently used therapies worldwide and is associated with benefits, risks, and costs. OBJECTIVE: To develop a set of evidence-based recommendations for patient blood management (PBM) and for research. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The scientific committee developed 17 Population/Intervention/Comparison/Outcome (PICO) questions for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in adult patients in 3 areas: preoperative anemia (3 questions), RBC transfusion thresholds (11 questions), and implementation of PBM programs (3 questions). These questions guided the literature search in 4 biomedical databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Transfusion Evidence Library), searched from inception to January 2018. Meta-analyses were conducted with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology and the Evidence-to-Decision framework by 3 panels including clinical and scientific experts, nurses, patient representatives, and methodologists, to develop clinical recommendations during a consensus conference in Frankfurt/Main, Germany, in April 2018. FINDINGS: From 17 607 literature citations associated with the 17 PICO questions, 145 studies, including 63 randomized clinical trials with 23 143 patients and 82 observational studies with more than 4 million patients, were analyzed. For preoperative anemia, 4 clinical and 3 research recommendations were developed, including the strong recommendation to detect and manage anemia sufficiently early before major elective surgery. For RBC transfusion thresholds, 4 clinical and 6 research recommendations were developed, including 2 strong clinical recommendations for critically ill but clinically stable intensive care patients with or without septic shock (recommended threshold for RBC transfusion, hemoglobin concentration <7 g/dL) as well as for patients undergoing cardiac surgery (recommended threshold for RBC transfusion, hemoglobin concentration <7.5 g/dL). For implementation of PBM programs, 2 clinical and 3 research recommendations were developed, including recommendations to implement comprehensive PBM programs and to use electronic decision support systems (both conditional recommendations) to improve appropriate RBC utilization. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The 2018 PBM International Consensus Conference defined the current status of the PBM evidence base for practice and research purposes and established 10 clinical recommendations and 12 research recommendations for preoperative anemia, RBC transfusion thresholds for adults, and implementation of PBM programs. The relative paucity of strong evidence to answer many of the PICO questions supports the need for additional research and an international consensus for accepted definitions and hemoglobin thresholds, as well as clinically meaningful end points for multicenter trials.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2019.0554

Cites

97 of 97 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 97 references

Cited by

See all 632

Metadata

Authors
Mueller, M. M., Van Remoortel, H., Meybohm, P., Aranko, K., Aubron, C., Burger, R., Carson, J. L., Cichutek, K., De Buck, E., Devine, D., Fergusson, D., Folléa, G., French, C., Frey, K. P., Gammon, R., Levy, J. H., Murphy, M. F., Ozier, Y., Pavenski, K., So-Osman, C., Tiberghien, P., Volmink, J., Waters, J. H., Wood, E. M., Seifried, E., & for the ICC PBM Frankfurt 2018 Group
Venue
JAMA
Published
2019-03-12
Volume
321
Issue
10
Pages
983
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2921053578
Cited by
632
References
97
FWCI
38.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patient Blood Management: Recommendations From the 2018 Frankfurt Consensus Conference. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2019.0554
The paper
Mueller, M. M., Van Remoortel, H., Meybohm, P., Aranko, K., Aubron, C., Burger, R., Carson, J. L., Cichutek, K., De Buck, E., Devine, D., Fergusson, D., Folléa, G., French, C., Frey, K. P., Gammon, R., Levy, J. H., Murphy, M. F., Ozier, Y., Pavenski, K., . . . for the ICC PBM Frankfurt 2018 Group. (2019). Patient Blood Management: Recommendations From the 2018 Frankfurt Consensus Conference. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.0554

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.