ArticleAdvances in hematology2025
Exploring Adverse Blood Donation Reactions Among Whole Blood Donors at a Tertiary Hospital Setting: A One-Center Observational Mixed-Methods Study.
Article in Advances in hematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although blood donation saves lives, it may be associated with adverse reactions. These reactions may be immediate or delayed and may be a factor in donor nonreturn. However, there is limited knowledge about blood donation-related adverse reactions and risk factors specific to the Ghanaian context. Aim: To determine the prevalence of adverse blood donation reactions and associated risk factors among successful blood donors at a tertiary hospital setting. Materials and Methods: This mixed-methods research (May-June 2024) used observational techniques and semistructured questionnaires to investigate adverse reactions during and after blood donation. The study recruited 279 participants (241 mobile session donors and 38 in-house donations) in a tertiary setting blood collection center. Bivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of some donor demographics on adverse reactions. Results: Overall, the prevalence of immediate adverse reaction was 44.4%; 51.4%, 36.5%, and 12.1% were local, vasovagal, and allergies, respectively. Blood donors who experienced adverse events had a statistically significantly lower median age ( Conclusion: There is an urgent need to build staff competencies and operationalize standard operating protocols to enable staff to identify and handle adverse blood donation events quickly. Further studies are needed to understand the factors responsible for the high prevalence of adverse donor reactions to inform improvements in blood donor care.
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.