MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Applied tension may help retain donors who are ambivalent about needles

2009· article· en· W1999739057 on OpenAlex
Blaine Ditto, Christopher France, Cheryl Holly

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueVox Sanguinis · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBlood donation and transfusion practices
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Blood Services
KeywordsAmbivalenceDonationBlood donorVasovagal syncopeMedicineBlood collectionPsychologyBlood lossSocial psychologySurgeryAnesthesiaEmergency medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Vasovagal symptoms can discourage people who might otherwise give blood on many occasions. However, the effects of symptoms on donor retention as well as the effects of treatments to reduce vasovagal symptoms on donor retention are probably moderated by a person's confidence that they can tolerate the procedure. METHODS: Data from a study on the effects of the muscle tensing technique applied tension (AT) on donor retention were examined to determine if (1) the degree of donor ambivalence about needles influenced the impact of vasovagal symptoms on subsequent return and (2) ambivalence about needles moderated the effect of learning AT on donor return. One-year follow-up data on 614 people who had previously given blood and were randomly assigned to either a no treatment, donation-as-usual condition or one of two conditions involving AT were obtained. Self-reported degree of needle ambivalence and vasovagal symptoms were assessed during the initial blood donation. RESULTS: Among participants in the no treatment group, increases in vasovagal symptoms were associated with decreases in donor return but only among people who expressed some fear of blood draws. Similarly, among people who expressed no fear of needles, learning AT had no effect on post-donation estimate of the likelihood they would give blood again or return rate. However, among people with some fear of blood draws learning AT led to both a higher estimate that they would give blood again as well as actual return rate. CONCLUSIONS: The experience of vasovagal symptoms may not deter people who are generally confident in their ability to tolerate blood donation. However, among people who are ambivalent about needles, symptoms may 'confirm' pre-existing doubts about their suitability for blood donation and lead to drop-out. Targeted interventions that give the uncertain volunteer a sense of confidence that they might be able to realize their goal and become a regular blood donor may be useful.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it