Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37677092›Full record

SynthesisBlood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue2024

The health impacts of blood donation: a systematic review of donor and non-donor perceptions.

Rachel Thorpe, Barbara Masser, Sarah P Coundouris, Melissa K Hyde, Sarah P Kruse, Tanya E Davison

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Love vs. Risk: Women with Sickle Cell Disease Face Reproductive Decision-Making Dilemmas.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel ThorpeClinical Services and Research, Australia Red Cross Lifeblood, Australia.
Barbara MasserClinical Services and Research, Australia Red Cross Lifeblood, Australia.
Sarah P CoundourisClinical Services and Research, Australia Red Cross Lifeblood, Australia.
Melissa K HydeClinical Services and Research, Australia Red Cross Lifeblood, Australia.
Sarah P KruseClinical Services and Research, Australia Red Cross Lifeblood, Australia.
Tanya E DavisonClinical Services and Research, Australia Red Cross Lifeblood, Australia.
University of Queensland · AUMonash University · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe health and well-being of volunteer donors is of critical concern for blood collection agencies responsible for ensuring a stable supply of blood products. However, lay understandings of the impact of donating blood on health remain poorly understood. As lay perceptions are likely to influence critical decisions about donation, understanding these perceptions is key for informing evidence-based approaches to donor retention and recruitment. As such, we conducted a systematic review of the blood donation literature to identify donors' and non-donors' perceptions of the short and longer-term physiological health effects of whole-blood and/or blood product donation. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis review was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines. Studies published from January 1995 to February 2021 were included. Perceptions were defined as both experiences and beliefs. Psychological effects were considered outside the scope of the review.

resultsA total of 247 studies were included. Most studies (89.5%) had donation-related health perceptions as a background rather than a central (10.5%) focus, and they were only assessed in relation to whole blood donation. More results focused on health-related beliefs than experiences (82 vs 18%), specific rather than general beliefs and experiences (80 vs 20%) and more frequently examined negative than positive beliefs and experiences (83 vs 17%). The most commonly studied and reported specific negative beliefs related to increased risk of infectious disease, reduced vitality, vasovagal reactions and low iron. Most studies examining specific negative beliefs were conducted in Asian countries. DISCUSSION: Findings reinforce that lay perspectives on how donation impacts health are under-researched, and it is difficult to know how important these are in informing critical decisions about donation for donors and non-donors. We suggest that further research with donation-related health beliefs and experiences as the central focus is needed to provide insights to inform communications with donors and the public.

Indexed as

Blood DonationBlood DonorsAsiaHumansPerception

Identifiers

PMID37677092
PMCPMC10812890
OpenAlexW4386530138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.