eHealth interventions have been proposed as a possible solution to overcome major obstacles associated with low adherence rates, low accessibility, and high costs of parenting programs. Due to the number and variety of interventions found in the literature, this study aimed to conduct a scoping review of parenting interventions directed at supporting parents in promoting their child's health and carrying out disease-related tasks. The scoping review identified 119 technology-based programs directed both at universal, preventive objectives and at the management and adaptation to chronic or severe acute health conditions. Several different web-based applications have been creatively used in healthrelated parenting interventions. Most programs use evidence-based psychological methodologies to promote parental self-management, build specific parenting skills, and provide customized feedback and social support. Further studies are needed to assess the contribution of the Internet and mobile applications to enhance the effectiveness of health-related parenting interventions and the dissemination of empirically validated programs.

The new DHQ was acceptable to the vast majority of donors. Potential donors who were older, male gender and less educated were most at risk of refusing to donate and may benefit from educational interventions.

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> To maintain a sufficient donor pool, deferred first-time donors (FTD) should be motivated to return for blood donation. This pilot study investigates how deferral affects momentary mood, satisfaction with the donation process, and subsequent return behavior to examine their potential for motivating (deferred) FTD. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> All of the subjects (<i>n</i> = 96) completed a first questionnaire (A1) before pre-donation assessment. Deferred FTD (<i>n</i> = 22) were asked to complete a second questionnaire (A2) immediately after deferral, while non-deferred FTD (<i>n</i> = 74) filled in the second questionnaire (A3) after blood donation. The impact of deferral, momentary mood, and satisfaction with the donation process on return behavior within 12 months was tested by calculating two path analyses, controlling for sex and age. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Mood (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001) and satisfaction with social aspects of the donation process (<i>p</i> = 0.01) were decreased after deferral. Deferred FTD were less likely than non-deferred FTD to return to the blood donation center within 12 months (60.8 vs. 36.4%; <i>p</i> = 0.043). However, path analyses revealed that deferral effects on mood and satisfaction were not connected to return behavior. Instead, age had a significant influence on return behavior (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.05) such that, overall, non-returning FTD were older than returning FTD, regardless of their deferral status. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Our findings suggest that mood and satisfaction with the donation process are directly affected by deferral but not clearly responsible for low return rates. It seems promising to embed these variables in established health behavior models in further studies to increase the return rates of deferred FTD.

Background and objectives Previous studies observed a transient increase in well‐being in about one‐third of regular donors after blood donation. In addition, personal contact with donors after donation seems to increase return rates. We were interested whether changes in well‐being and/or personal contact after the first donation impact return rates of first‐time donors (FTDs). Materials and methods First‐time donors were randomized to a questionnaire group (QG), in which questionnaires assessing the well‐being had to be filled in, or a control group (CG), which was not contacted with a questionnaire. The QG had to complete the same questionnaire three times at the day of the first donation and then four times over an 8‐week period with reminding calls by the study coordinator. Return rates of participants were followed for 12 months. Results A total of 102 FTDs participated in the QG and 115 in the CG. Changes in well‐being after the first donation had minimal impact on the return rates. In contrast, contacting FTDs after their first donation had a significant impact on the return rate of male donors (89·2% in the QG vs. 58·3% in the CG; P = 0·001). Females showed no significant difference in return rates between both groups (P = 0·32). Conclusion The well‐being of FTDs had no influence on their return rate. The intervention of regular contacts during a research project follow‐up resulted in an increased return rate of male but not of female FTDs. The pronounced difference of the impact of this intervention between male and female donors requires further studies.