ArticleTransfusion2025
Assessing HIV trends among blood donors in five Brazilian blood centers: The impact of individual donor assessment.
Article in Transfusion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anemia, wasting syndrome, and tattooing: A clinical triad to suspect HIV in the community.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2026Article
- HIV serologic reactivity varies with time of ART initiation in persons on long-term ART.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Reentry of voluntary blood donors in Chongqing, China (2022-2024): a retrospective single-center analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Assessing HIV trends among blood donors in five Brazilian blood centers: The impact of individual donor assessment.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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn many countries, including Brazil, time-based blood donation deferral policies for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) have been replaced by individual donor assessment (IDA). We examined HIV prevalence and incidence among first-time (FTD) and repeat donors (RD), comparing data from ~3.5 years before and after the IDA policy implementation in 2020. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsThe Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-IV-Pediatric (REDS-IV-P) Brazil component collects blood donor screening data from five public centers. From January 2017 to December 2023, we report frequencies, rates, and 95% confidence interval (CI) of confirmed HIV-positive donations among FTD, HIV NAT-yield rates for FTD and RD, and the incidence of confirmed HIV among RD before and after the policy change. We also report multivariable regression analysis results.
resultsConfirmed HIV prevalence in FTD was 79 per 100,000 (95% CI 72-87) before and 100 per 100,000 (95% CI 90-109) after the policy change, with differences between centers. HIV NAT-yield rates decreased for RD (p = .0025), with no change for FTD (p = .3). HIV incidence in RD did not increase (12.4 [95% CI: 11.1-13.9] vs. 10.3 [95% CI: 9-11.7] per 100,000 person-years). DISCUSSION: Our findings showed no significant difference in HIV incidence among RD. Although HIV prevalence among FTD increased, there was no rise in HIV NAT-yield donations. The analysis highlights challenges in interpreting changes within specific groups and blood centers, underscoring the importance of multicenter monitoring of transfusion-transmitted infections.
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.