P‐BB‐45 | Implementing Sexual Behavior‐Based Screening: Staff Training Has Never Been More Important
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In September 2022, donation criteria that deferred sexually active gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men were replaced with sexual behavior-based screening criteria (SBBS) that asks all donors about specific sexual behaviors at Canadian Blood Services (CBS). This abstract describes the development and evaluation of a research and community-informed sex positive training program, that supported implementation of SBBS. 2SLGBTBTQIA+ CBS employees and community members, front-line staff and researchers provided insights for implementation training. All agreed that intensive, interactive training was essential for implementation of the SBBS. A comprehensive training program with two arms was developed. Arm one, mandatory for all donor-facing staff, included an introduction to sex-positivity e-learning module, that was complemented by an in-person scenario-based session. Arm two, mandatory for all staff who screen donors, included technical training with self-directed e-learning modules summarizing the evidence informing SBBS, and practical implications of SBBS. All CBS employees were given access to the electronic training materials and encouraged to participate. After the initial training, feedback from course participants was gathered to further improve the course. When SBBS launched, nearly 1700 staff had completed arm one and 900 staff had completed arm two. Four hundred thirty-eight (34%) of the employees who completed arm one provided feedback on the training prior to SBBS implementation. Diverse roles of front-line staff were well represented. Eighty-five percent of respondents found the training good to excellent, and 85% also agreed/strongly agreed that the sessions were engaging. Most respondents (85%) found that the training is directly applicable to their job and 84% found the educational materials helpful. Those who disagreed about the utility of training (3%) commented that talking about sexual behavior, even in the context of donor screening, is unnecessary in a workplace. As a result of the training, 79% of the respondents felt that their communication skills improved. Many commented that they were prepared to be more patient, understanding and respectful of people they interact with and are more mindful of fostering diversity and inclusion—professionally and personally. Respondents commented that they would prefer having ongoing training to ensure their competency was maintained. Post-implementation, all aspects of the SBBS training has been incorporated into new staff onboarding and are provided through e-Learning modules. In summary, collaboration with external and internal stakeholders, centering 2SLGBTQIA+ lived experience, recipient and donors led the development of a comprehensive multi-modal SBBS implementation training which was seen as valuable by participants and is now available for all CBS employees.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".