ArticleJournal of public health in Africa2017
Negative peri-donation events among whole blood donors in a blood bank in Ibadan, Nigeria.
Article in Journal of public health in Africa, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The existence and sustenance of the blood bank depends on blood donors. It is imperative that the donation experience is satisfactory for the donors. Therefore this study was carried out to determine the frequency of undesirable events experienced by the blood donor as part of donor haemovigilance. This was a retrospective descriptive study of the events that occurred amongst the blood donors of the blood bank of a tertiary institution. The blood donor incident book was reviewed for the period of six months. Negative undesirable events occurred in 2% of the donor populations, of which 45.8% could not complete the blood donation process while only 16.7% completed the blood donation process. Mild vasovagal attack occurred in 0.2% of the donor population. Undisclosed deferrable risk factors/ behaviours were identified by the phlebotomist in the bleeding room which made donors unfit for donation even though they had passed the donor screening criteria. This accounted for 20.8% of those with negative experience. Guidelines are required to identify donors that are not likely to complete donation to avoid wastage of time, blood, resources and reduce undesirable experiences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.