Title: Advances in blood donor policies in relation to gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) and transgender populations as donors: A scoping review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Globally, the updating of donor policies in relation to gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM), transgender, and gender diverse populations remains an important public health issue. The purpose of this scoping review was to determine how Canada and other OECD countries are addressing this issue in relation to plasma and whole blood donation policies. Methods: The scoping review included English-language peer-reviewed empirical studies from OECD countries from 1997 to 2020 to better understand the shifts in donor policies over this time period. Initial search criteria resulted in 3,974 abstracts and titles. Researchers reviewed abstracts according to eligibility criteria which yielded a total of 51 published studies for full review. Data charting was based on Arksey and O’Malley’s framework for scoping reviews. Results: Key considerations included the reliance on mathematical modeling and behavioural risk surveillance data as a means of continuing with the status quo in informing donor policies which continue to ban sexually active gbMSM from donating. In addition, there is a lack of focus on the unique concerns facing transgender, gender diverse, and racially diverse populations who may wish to donate whole blood or plasma. Conclusions: There is a growing international policy shift in reducing the lifetime donor ban and/or removing the ban for gbMSM to donate blood. More needs to be done to both clarify the rationale for such policies in the face of current scientific evidence and testing and to ensure inclusion of transgender, gender diverse, and racially diverse populations in the formation of policies and information about both whole blood and plasma donations. Finally, blood operators need to work more closely with diverse donor communities to ensure the approach taken is in keeping with the needs of gbMSM, transgender, and gender diverse populations.
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 | 0.019 | 0.092 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".