The donor health assessment questionnaire: potential for format change and computer‐assisted self‐interviews to improve donor attention

Goldman, Mindy; Ram, Sanjay K.; Yi, Qilong; Mazerall, John; O’Brien, Sheila F

doi:10.1111/j.1537-2995.2007.01329.x

Cited by 20 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The donors who participated in the survey were demographically similar to the general donor base [ ;7], except there were somewhat fewer first‐time donors in the sample compared to all CBS donors who donated during the study period (8·4% vs. 11·2%, P < 0·01).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Donor's understanding of the definition of sex as applied to predonation screening questions

O’Brien

Ram

et al. 2008

Vox Sanguinis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Donor's understanding of the definition of sex as applied to predonation screening questions

O’Brien

Ram

et al. 2008

Vox Sanguinis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, improvement of the screening questionnaire by increasing the number of questions about specific high‐risk behaviors and test‐seeking tendency, modifying the questionnaire language or design to facilitate potential donors' fast reading and comprehension, or improving the facilities where donors may have more privacy while completing questionnaires, are a few alternatives to optimize the effectiveness of donor screening. For example, using audio computer‐assisted self‐interview in a private room has shown some advantages over face‐to‐face interview or paper questionnaire in the donor selection process . If applied in Chinese blood centers, audio computer‐assisted self‐interview may help reduce the potential misunderstanding of questions due to poor education and maximize the ease for donors with high‐risk behaviors to accurately answer certain sensitive questions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, using audio computer-assisted selfinterview in a private room has shown some advantages over face-to-face interview or paper questionnaire in the donor selection process. 38,39 If applied in Chinese blood centers, audio computer-assisted self-interview may help reduce the potential misunderstanding of questions due to poor education and maximize the ease for donors with high-risk behaviors to accurately answer certain sensitive questions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of risk factors for human immunodeficiency virus infection among Chinese blood donors

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Information regarding the risk factors for HIV infection among Chinese donors is important for understanding the trend of HIV transmission routes and for developing effective donor behavioral screening policies. Methods In 2009–2011, 77 HIV positive and 649 HIV negative consented donors who screened non-reactive for HBV, HCV, Syphilis, and ALT in four REDS-II Chinese regions received and completed a questionnaire by mail regarding their recent and past medical procedures, drug use, and sexual behaviors as well as the reason for making a donation. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses grouped questions into three risk factors. Multivariable logistic regression analysis examined the relationship between dichotomized factor scores (> median for higher risks vs. <=median for lower risks) and HIV status adjusting for center, age, gender, and education. Results More males (81% vs. 64%), donors with < high school education (38.2% vs. 15.5%), and divorced/separated/widowed donors (14% vs. 4%) were in the HIV positive than negative group. The three risk factors were: Test-seeking tendency, medical-related risks, and behavioral risks. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, greater test-seeking tendency and behavioral risks were associated with HIV infection, adjusted ORs being 2.2 (1.2–4.1) and 3.8 (1.8–7.9) respectively; but medical risks were not, OR: 1.2 (0.6–2.2). In comparison to less high school education, high school and above education was significantly associated with lower risks for HIV infection, ORs being 0.35 (CI: 0.17–0.70) and 0.17 (CI: 0.09–0.33), respectively. Conclusions Test-seeking tendency and high-risk sexual behaviors are important predictors of HIV infection in Chinese blood donors, suggesting that the Health History Inquiry used in donor selection process needs improvement to defer high-risk donors more effectively.

show abstract

“…Formatting includes clarity of presentation and ease of administration. Issues to consider in formatting a PRO include placement of instructions; presentation of response options; use of numbers, boxes, or circles for recording item responses; positioning of page breaks relative to content; use of instructions to continue to the next page; placement of instructions beyond the first page; use of skip patterns; and font size and type [17,18]. Consideration should also be given to potential changes in mode of administration [19].…”

Section: Evaluate Items Against Item Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Content Validity—Establishing and Reporting the Evidence in Newly Developed Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Instruments for Medical Product Evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force Report: Part 2—Assessing Respondent Understanding

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of content validity in developing patient reported outcomes (PRO) instruments is stressed by both the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency. Content validity is the extent to which an instrument measures the important aspects of concepts developers or users purport it to assess. A PRO instrument measures the concepts most relevant and important to a patient's condition and its treatment. For PRO instruments, items and domains as reflected in the scores of an instrument should be important to the target population and comprehensive with respect to patient concerns. Documentation of target population input in item generation, as well as evaluation of patient understanding through cognitive interviewing, can provide the evidence for content validity. Part 1 of this task force report covers elicitation of key concepts using qualitative focus groups and/or interviews to inform content and structure of a new PRO instrument. Building on qualitative interviews and focus groups used to elicit concepts, cognitive interviews help developers craft items that can be understood by respondents in the target population and can ultimately confirm that the final instrument is appropriate, comprehensive, and understandable in the target population. Part 2 details: 1) the methods for conducting cognitive interviews that address patient understanding of items, instructions, and response options; and 2) the methods for tracking item development through the various stages of research and preparing this tracking for submission to regulatory agencies. The task force report's two parts are meant to be read together. They are intended to offer suggestions for good practice in planning, executing, and documenting qualitative studies that are used to support the content validity of PRO instruments to be used in medical product evaluation.

show abstract

The donor health assessment questionnaire: potential for format change and computer‐assisted self‐interviews to improve donor attention

Abstract: The current format of the Canadian DHAQ is not optimal for donor attention to specific questions asked as part of a list. Attention was improved by use of AABB uniform donor history questionnaire format and was best with use of a CASI format.

Cited by 20 publications

References 16 publications

Donor's understanding of the definition of sex as applied to predonation screening questions

Donor's understanding of the definition of sex as applied to predonation screening questions

An analysis of risk factors for human immunodeficiency virus infection among Chinese blood donors

Content Validity—Establishing and Reporting the Evidence in Newly Developed Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Instruments for Medical Product Evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force Report: Part 2—Assessing Respondent Understanding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About