Finding effective ways to retain blood donors is crucial. This study seeks to compare, in a context of a voluntary and nonremunerated system, donor demographics and deterrents to blood donation among plasma/platelet donors (PPDs), regular whole blood donors (WBDs), and lapsed whole blood donors (LWBD). Among 1879 participants to a survey on motivations, time use, and blood donation, 207 WBDs (26%) and 148 PPDs (31%) said that they reduced their donation frequency over the last 5 years. Participants to this survey also included 609 LWBDs, who did not donate in the past 5 years. We asked about reasons why they reduce or cease to donate blood and demographic variables. χ(2) Tests were completed to determine which deterrents stand out across the 3 blood donor groups. The deterrent indicating the highest percentage was "time constraints related to work or studies" (43% for all respondents). Comparison of WBDs, LWBDs, and PPDs shows that results for 7 deterrents were statistically different between the 3 groups. Obstacles to donating blood also vary based on sex, age (life course), and level of education. Blood collection agencies should consider developing new retention strategies tailored to blood donors, taking into account the specific profiles of female/male donors, events that typically occur at various stages of life, and particular challenges associated with differences in levels of education.
Trust issues, perceived discrimination and social exclusion have structural and historical roots that can only be partly overcome with long-term efforts to increase awareness, develop collaborative partnerships and increase institutional efforts to adapt to the challenges of blood donation from Black citizens.
This study sought to compare demographics and donation motivations among plasma/platelet donors (PPDs) and whole blood donors (WBDs), in a voluntary and non-remunerated context. Motives to donate blood and demographic characteristics were collected through questionnaires completed by 795 WBDs and 473 PPDs. Comparison of WBDs and PPDs under chi-square tests showed that 17 out of 23 motivators were statistically different according to various demographic variables. These results demonstrate the existence of specific donor profiles both for WBDs and PPDs. Agencies should develop new recruitment strategies tailored to these donors, especially if they wish to convince WBDs to convert to apheresis donation.
The debate on the limits and relevance of the different name generators comes with the development of social network studies. The core questions are: What are they supposed to construct? For what research question? Some procedures tend to choose a precise target with a unique name generator; others prefer to use a series of name generators. The authors discuss here some specificities and advantages of these methods for ego-centered networks. The authors then present the ''contextual'' name generator, which was developed in longitudinal qualitative panel studies in France and Québec. This tool gives access to a great variety of information focused on sociological questions. Its original design differentiates two complementary stages to distinguish the global contexts-based network from specific resource-based networks. This tool remains flexible and may be adapted to different topics
This overview of contemporary representations of blood in relation to blood donation in Quebec illustrates that though this substance might be disenchanted for many, it still maintains its mysteriousness for others, which underpins the importance of its social, cultural, and religious representations that can potentially lead to useful avenues in improving donor recruitment and retention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.