ArticleVox sanguinis2026
Higher uptake of common adult vaccines in Australian blood donors: An analysis of linked registry data.
Article in Vox sanguinis, 2026. 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.
- Higher uptake of common adult vaccines in Australian blood donors: An analysis of linked registry data.Vox sanguinis · 2026Article
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
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesUnderstanding differences in blood donor vaccine uptake is essential for accurately interpreting serosurveillance of vaccine-preventable diseases and other research using donor samples and/or data. We aimed to assess vaccination uptake in donors and non-donors. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe linked the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study data to blood donation records, the Australian Immunization Register and death records. Participants were categorized as active donors, lapsed donors or non-donors. Influenza, herpes-zoster, pneumococcal and COVID-19 vaccine uptake were analysed in the age groups recommended and eligible for free vaccination and for pertussis in the age group recommended. We calculated age- and sex-adjusted uptake percentages and differences averaged across 2021-2023, except for COVID-19 vaccine. Multivariable regression models were used to assess the association between donor status and vaccination uptake, adjusting for potential confounders.
resultsOf the 266,432 participants available for this research, 216,338 were eligible for analysis in 2021. Of these, 5734 (2.7%) were active donors, 29,237 (13.5%) were lapsed donors and 181,367 (83.8%) were non-donors. Active donors had higher vaccination uptake than non-donors (adjusted uptake ratio [95% confidence interval, CI] for influenza 1.05 [1.04, 1.06], herpes-zoster 1.20 [1.13, 1.28], pneumococcal 1.10 [1.03, 1.17], pertussis 1.09 [1.00, 1.18]), ≥2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine in 2021 1.02 [1.01, 1.02] and booster COVID-19 dose in the second half of 2023 1.08 [1.02, 1.15]. Similarly, lapsed donors had higher vaccination uptake than non-donors.
conclusionBlood donors have a higher uptake for funded/recommended adult vaccines than non-donors. These findings provide evidence of vaccination rate differences that may impact interpretation of studies where blood donor samples and/or data are used.
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.