ArticleTransfusion2025
Exploring the experiences of hemochromatosis (HHC) patients who undergo therapeutic venesection at a blood collection agency.
Article in Transfusion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying risk modifiers of hereditary hemochromatosis using genomic and electronic health record data.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2026Article
- Exploring the experiences of hemochromatosis (HHC) patients who undergo therapeutic venesection at a blood collection agency.Transfusion · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople with hereditary hemochromatosis (HHC) require therapeutic phlebotomy on an ongoing basis. Little is known about the facilitators and barriers they experience in donating at a blood collection agency (BCA), nor how these impact their willingness to engage in an ongoing relationship with a BCA. This study explored the experiences of HHC donors undergoing therapeutic phlebotomy at the Australian Red Cross Lifeblood (Lifeblood) in Australia. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsAll HHC donors who had made at least one donation at Lifeblood in the last 2 years were invited to complete a survey. In this paper, we report the findings on enablers and barriers to donating at Lifeblood, donor and patient identity, communication, knowledge of blood use and of plasma, interest in donating plasma, and engagement in positive word of mouth about donating.
resultsData were obtained from 4350 therapeutic donors. Responders identified more enablers than barriers to donating at Lifeblood and 61.8% reported that Lifeblood used their blood. Responders were more likely to identify as donors than patients, and those with a stronger donor than patient identity were significantly more likely to report that their blood was used, had greater interest in donating plasma, and reported engaging in more positive word of mouth about donating. DISCUSSION: Findings indicate that BCAs can do more to educate donors with HHC about how their blood is used to help others. Doing so may help to retain them as donors and can be beneficial for the blood supply, as well as for the donors themselves.
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.