SynthesisBritish journal of health psychology2025
Factors influencing unrelated stem cell donation a mixed-methods integrated systematic review.
Synthesis in British journal of health psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Factors influencing unrelated stem cell donation a mixed-methods integrated systematic review.British journal of health psychology · 2025Pooled it
- Decision-making experience for second donation in unrelated hematopoietic stem cell donors: a descriptive qualitative study.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere is an imbalance between demand for and availability of stem cell donors worldwide. The purpose of this systematic review is to provide the first comprehensive understanding of facilitators and barriers influencing unrelated stem cell donation (USCD) in adults, through a data synthesis of qualitative and quantitative evidence. Identification of the facilitators and barriers associated with stem cell donation intention and behaviour is essential to inform the development of behaviour change interventions to meet the current demand.
methodsFour databases were searched (Embase, PsycINFO, MEDLINE and CINAHL) and the last search was in February 2021. The search was limited to studies written in English and published from 1980 to present. Screening, quality assessment, data extraction and data synthesis incorporating the COM-B model were undertaken in line with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for an integrated mixed-methods review.
resultsFifty studies were included in the review, analysis and mapping produced four integrated findings. Donation-related knowledge was a facilitator and conversely, lack of knowledge was a barrier to donation related behaviours. Perceived convenience, positive social influences, religious beliefs and the accessibility of positive donation-related social norms promoted positive donation related behaviours. Altruism and sense of duty were the most commonly cited motives for donation related behaviours.Through mapping to the COM-B model, Communication/Marketing, and Service Provision are the primary policy categories that can be used to change donation related behaviours.
conclusionFuture interventions should focus on targeted education regarding unrelated stem cell donation and creating recruitment campaigns that emphasise the life-saving potential of donation.
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.