Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41208297›Full record

ArticleTransfusion2025

Blood donation criteria in Australia: Population knowledge, misperceptions, and impact on donation intent.

Yasmin Mowat, Veronica Hoad, Bridget Haire, Barbara Masser, Anita Heywood, Rachel Thorpe, Hamish McManus, John Kaldor, Skye McGregor

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Transfusion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Yasmin MowatThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Veronica HoadAustralian Red Cross Lifeblood, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Bridget HaireThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Barbara MasserAustralian Red Cross Lifeblood, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Anita HeywoodSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Rachel ThorpeAustralian Red Cross Lifeblood, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Hamish McManusThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
John KaldorThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Skye McGregorThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1151959
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMisperceptions about blood donation eligibility can deter individuals from donating. In Australia, misperceptions of one's eligibility status may be exacerbated by recent changes to donor criteria. However, public knowledge of these criteria remains underexplored.

methodsThis study examines the accuracy of perceived eligibility and knowledge of blood donation criteria using data from a nationally representative survey of the Australian population.

resultsAmong the 5178 respondents, knowledge of blood donation criteria was limited, with 29.4% of non-donors unaware of their existence. Of the 57.3% classified as eligible for blood donation at the time of survey completion, 12.4% incorrectly believed they were ineligible and 13.3% did not know their status. Among those classified as ineligible, 55.8% misjudged their status; 36.6% mistakenly believed they were eligible, while 19.2% were uncertain. Those who believed they were eligible were most likely to intend to donate in the next 6 months (35.1%). Overall, knowledge of deferral periods relating to common exclusion factors was poor.

conclusionThis study indicates a substantial lack of awareness of blood donation criteria and highlights widespread misperceptions and poor knowledge of the criteria in Australia. While most eligible individuals correctly recognized their eligibility, many others may be unnecessarily self-deferring due to the mistaken belief that they are ineligible. Blood collection agencies should design tailored communication strategies to ensure that eligible individuals are aware of their eligibility, and those who are ineligible understand their status and are informed about when they might become eligible to donate.

Indexed as

Blood DonorsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeIntentionAdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaBlood DonationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultblood donationcriteriadeferralseligibilityknowledgemisconceptionsmisperceptionsperceptions

Identifiers

PMID41208297
PMCPMC12704694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.