Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42267577›Full record

ArticleTransfusion2026

The neurodivergent blood donor: Fairness, discrimination, screening, and behavior.

Eamonn Ferguson, Niall O'Hagan, Richard Mills, Muskaan Pal, Robert Smith, Katy Davison, Claire Reynolds, Claire Claydon, Naim Akhtar, Dani Ropar and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transfusion, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Eamonn FergusonSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7678-1451
Niall O'HaganSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-9796-3215
Richard MillsSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1161-5815
Muskaan PalSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4732-9458
Robert SmithSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Katy DavisonNHSBT/UKHSA, Epidemiology Unit, Bristol, UK.
Claire ReynoldsNHSBT/UKHSA, Epidemiology Unit, Bristol, UK.
Claire ClaydonDonor Experience Services, NHSBT, Bristol, UK.
Naim AkhtarConsultant in Donor Medicine, NHSBT, Bristol, UK.
Dani RoparSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Blandine FrenchSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9395-5919
Lauren MarshSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6021-4383
Barbara MasserNational Institute for Health and Care Research Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Donor Health and Behaviour, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9385-6497
Gareth HumpherysHead of Insight and Research, Co-Chair Neurodiversity Network, NHSBT, Bristol, UK.
Susan R BrailsfordConsultant in Epidemiology and Health Protection, Associate Medical Director, Microbiology and Public Health, NHSBT, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2856-0387

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR203337NHS Blood and Transplant 135PATH24
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe broaden the ongoing drive to diversify blood donor panels by proposing and testing a framework to explore neurodivergence and blood donation. Drawing on a range of theoretical perspectives, we predict that neurodivergent people will be underrepresented in donor panels, donate less frequently, perceive donor selection as less fair and more discriminatory, be more likely to guess when answering screening questions, and find these questions upsetting. STUDY DESIGN AND

methods4376 members of the UK general-public and 8668 NHSBT blood donors indicated if they had a formal or self-diagnosis of Autism, ADHD, or Dyslexia. Participants answered online questions about travel and sexual and social behavior from the NHSBT Donation Safety Check (DSC) as if they were donating. For each question, participants indicated whether it was emotionally upsetting, whether it was appropriate and necessary for recipient safety, and whether their answer was a guess/accurate. They also reported their perceived fairness/discrimination in donor selection and their donation frequency. We also assessed outcomes by age, sex, and ethnicity.

resultsReported neurodiverse donors make fewer donations and are underrepresented in donors relative to non-donors (7.6% vs. 13.3%). Neurodivergent donors and non-donors indicated they were more likely to guess, especially on travel questions and are more likely to report that the DSC questions are emotionally upsetting. All neurodivergent respondents (donors and non-donors) report blood donor selection as less fair and more discriminatory. DISCUSSION: Blood services need to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate and attract neurodivergent people to be donors and to ensure recipient safety.

Indexed as

Blood DonationBlood DonorsDonor SelectionAdolescentAdultAutistic DisorderFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID42267577
PMCPMC13452618

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.