‘One step closer’: Acceptability of a programme of plasma donation for fractionation from men who have sex with men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In Canada, Héma-Québec is considering the possibility of allowing men who have sex with men (MSM) to donate plasma for fractionation combined with a mandatory quarantine period. This study aims to assess the acceptability and operational feasibility of the programme in the targeted population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven focus groups with MSM (N = 47) were conducted in Montréal, regarding their beliefs underlying attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control relating to intention to participate in a programme of plasma donation for fractionation. A theoretical thematic content analysis was realized. RESULTS: Participants brought up benefits of the programme. Some are altruistic (help others, save lives, contribute as citizens), while others are linked to what it could bring to their community (progress, opportunity to include MSM in blood donation programmes, acknowledgement of MSM's contributions to the well-being of others). However, even if the programme is in accordance with their altruistic values, it clashes with their values of equality and social justice. Many disadvantages were raised (discrimination and stigmatization of MSM, the fact that their blood is presented as being not as good as the blood of others). Facilitating factors and barriers to participation were put forward in terms of programme characteristics and sites where donations would be made. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest some interest in the programme of plasma donation for fractionation, but this is significantly tempered by the fact that differential treatment for MSM would continue and that their demands regarding access to whole blood donation are still unmet.
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 | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".