Blood donation practices, motivations and beliefs in Montreal's Black communities: the modern gift under a new light
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Through the conceptual lens of the archaic and modern gift, this study aims to examine perceived limitations and facilitators to increasing blood donations within Black communities in Montreal, Canada. The overall objective is to support blood agencies, such as Héma-Québec, in understanding the challenges and opportunities they face in promoting blood donation among Black communities in pluralistic societies. DESIGN: Thirty-three semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with donors and leaders of ethnocultural groups in Montreal: of these, 6 were Héma-Québec employees; 3 were Caribbean blood drive organizers; 14 were leaders of African, Caribbean or Black multiethnic churches and community groups; and finally, 10 were donors, including 2 African, 4 French-speaking Haitian and 4 English-speaking Caribbean. RESULTS: The existence of multiple Black communities in Montreal reflects the various facilitators and obstacles facing Héma-Québec. Caribbean and African communities have their own experiences with regard to blood donation as well as different relationships with the broader Quebec society, both of which have great impact on how they perceive the cause. Questions of trust, of giving to the family and to the community, as well as perceived social exclusion appear to be fundamental issues for our informants. The current participation of groups interested in bettering the lives of those affected by sickle cell anaemia combined with the fact that leaders felt more comfortable donating to someone close to the community suggests that the promotion of blood donation through this angle would be well received. CONCLUSION: 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.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".