ArticleVox sanguinis2024
The prototypical UK blood donor, homophily and blood donation: Blood donors are like you, not me.
Article in Vox sanguinis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The neurodivergent blood donor: Fairness, discrimination, screening, and behavior.Transfusion · 2026Article
- Role of pain and anxiety in mediating relationships between donation history and vasovagal reaction symptoms in blood donors in England.Transfusion · 2026Article
- It is not all anti-policy attitudes: Viewing blood donation as a means to belong predicts blood donation among men who have sex with men.Transfusion medicine (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Breaking down barriers: Recruiting donors of African ancestry in Ireland.Vox sanguinis · 2025Article
- The prototypical UK blood donor, homophily and blood donation: Blood donors are like you, not me.Vox sanguinis · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesHomophily represents the extent to which people feel others are like them and encourages the uptake of activities they feel people like them do. Currently, there are no data on blood donor homophily with respect to (i) people's representation of the average prototypical UK blood donor and (ii) the degree of homophily with this prototype for current donors, non-donors, groups blood services wish to encourage (ethnic minorities), those who are now eligible following policy changes (e.g., men-who-have-sex-with-men: MSM) and recipients. We aim to fill these gaps in knowledge. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe surveyed the UK general population MSM, long-term blood recipients, current donors, non-donors and ethnic minorities (n = 785) to assess perceptions of the prototypical donor in terms of ethnicity, age, gender, social class, educational level and political ideology. Homophily was indexed with respect to age, gender and ethnicity.
resultsThe prototypical UK blood donor is perceived as White, middle-aged, middle-class, college-level educated and left-wing. Current donors and MSM are more homophilous with this prototype, whereas recipients and ethnic minorities have the lowest homophily. Higher levels of homophily are associated with an increased likelihood of committing to donate.
conclusionThe prototype of the UK donor defined this as a White activity. This, in part, may explain why ethnic minorities are less likely to be donors. As well as traditional recruitment strategies, blood services need to consider broader structural changes such as the ethnic diversity of staff and co-designing donor spaces with local communities.
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.