Dataset Information

Gay and Bisexual Men's Perceptions of the Donation and Use of Human Biological Samples for Research: A Qualitative Study.

ABSTRACT: Human biological samples (biosamples) are increasingly important in diagnosing, treating and measuring the prevalence of illnesses. For the gay and bisexual population, biosample research is particularly important for measuring the prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). By determining people's understandings of, and attitudes towards, the donation and use of biosamples, researchers can design studies to maximise acceptability and participation. In this study we examine gay and bisexual men's attitudes towards donating biosamples for HIV research. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 46 gay and bisexual men aged between 18 and 63 recruited in commercial gay scene venues in two Scottish cities. Interview transcripts were analysed thematically using the framework approach. Most men interviewed seemed to have given little prior consideration to the issues. Participants were largely supportive of donating tissue for medical research purposes, and often favourable towards samples being stored, reused and shared. Support was often conditional, with common concerns related to: informed consent; the protection of anonymity and confidentiality; the right to withdraw from research; and ownership of samples. Many participants were in favour of the storage and reuse of samples, but expressed concerns related to data security and potential misuse of samples, particularly by commercial organisations. The sensitivity of tissue collection varied between tissue types and collection contexts. Blood, urine, semen and bowel tissue were commonly identified as sensitive, and donating saliva and as unlikely to cause discomfort. To our knowledge, this is the first in-depth study of gay and bisexual men's attitudes towards donating biosamples for HIV research. While most men in this study were supportive of donating tissue for research, some clear areas of concern were identified. We suggest that these minority concerns should be accounted for to develop inclusive, evidence-informed research protocols that balance collective benefits with individual concerns.

SUBMITTER: Patterson C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4459996 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundResearchers and activists have long called for changes to blood donation policies to end what is frequently framed as unjustified bans or deferral periods for men who have sex with men (MSM). Since 2016, in Canada, a man had to be abstinent from all sexual contact (anal or oral sex) with other men for at least 12?months in order to be an eligible blood donor. As of June 3, 2019, this deferral period was reduced to 3?months.MethodsTo better understand the acceptance of existing deferral policies and possible future policy, we conducted 47 in-depth interviews with a demographically diverse sample of gay, bisexual, queer, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) in Canada's three largest cities: Vancouver, (n?=?17), Toronto (n?=?15), and Montreal (n?=?15). Interviews were coded in NVivo 11 following an inductive thematic analysis. We focus on men's preferred policy directions and their opinions about a policy change proposed by Canada's blood operators: a 3-month deferral for all sexual activity between men. We interviewed GBM approximately one-year before this new deferral policy was approved by Health Canada.ResultsMost participants were opposed to any deferral period in relation to MSM-specific sexual activity. A fair and safe policy was one that was the "same for everyone" and included screening for several risk factors during the blood donation process with no categorical exclusion of all sexually active MSM. Participants believed that multiple "gender blind" and HIV testing-related strategies could be integrated into the blood donation process. These preferences for a move away from MSM-specific exclusions aligned with their opinions concerning the possible change to a 3-month MSM deferral, for which participants shared three overarching perspectives: (1) step in the right direction; (2) ambivalence and uncertainty; and (3) not an improvement.ConclusionA predominant assertion was that a change from a 12-month to a 3-month deferral period would not resolve the fundamental issues of fairness and equity affecting blood screening practices for GBM in Canada. Many participants believed that blood donation policy should be based on more up-to-date scientific evidence concerning risk factor assessment and HIV testing.

Project description:BackgroundCanada has incrementally reduced restrictions to blood and plasma donation that impact men who have sex with men, gay, bisexual, and queer men, and some Two Spirit, transgender and non-binary individuals (MSM/2SGBTQ+). Prior to the launch of a pilot program in 2021 enabling some MSM/2SGBTQ + to donate source plasma, we explored the acceptability of the program among individuals who could become eligible to donate in the program.MethodsWe invited men identifying as MSM/2SGBTQ + to participate in two consecutive semi-structured interviews to explore their views on blood and plasma donation policy, plasma donation, and the proposed Canadian plasma donation program. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically and acceptability-related themes were mapped onto the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.ResultsTwenty-seven men identifying as having sex with men participated in 53 interviews. Eighteen themes were mapped onto the seven construct domains of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Underlying all aspects of acceptability was a tension between four primary values influencing participants' views: altruism, equity, supply sufficiency, and evidence-based policy. The program was viewed as welcome progress on a discriminatory policy, with many excited to participate, yet tension with inequitable aspects of the program undermined support for the program and interest to contribute to it. The high demands of the program are unique for MSM/2SGBTQ + and are only tolerable as part of a program that is an incremental and instrumental step to more equitable donation policies.ConclusionFindings highlight past experiences of exclusion in Canada as a unique and critical part of the context of the donation experience among MSM/2SGBTQ+. Despite the program's goals of greater inclusivity of MSM/2SGBTQ + individuals, the anticipated experience of the program included continued stigmatization and inequities. Future research should seek to understand the experienced views of MSM/2SGBTQ + donors to ensure that as policies change, policies are implemented equitably.

Project description:ObjectiveA mixed methods study exploring the UK general public's willingness to donate human biosamples (HBSs) for biomedical research.SettingCross-sectional focus groups followed by an online survey.ParticipantsTwelve focus groups (81 participants) selectively sampled to reflect a range of demographic groups; 1110 survey responders recruited through a stratified sampling method with quotas set on sex, age, geographical location, socioeconomic group and ethnicity.Main outcome measures(1) Identify participants' willingness to donate HBSs for biomedical research, (2) explore acceptability towards donating different types of HBSs in various settings and (3) explore preferences regarding use and access to HBSs.Results87% of survey participants thought donation of HBSs was important and 75% wanted to be asked to donate in general. Responders who self-reported having some or good knowledge of the medical research process were significantly more likely to want to donate (p<0.001). Reasons why focus group participants saw donation as important included: it was a good way of reciprocating for the medical treatment received; it was an important way of developing drugs and treatments; residual tissue would otherwise go to waste and they or their family members might benefit. The most controversial types of HBSs to donate included: brain post mortem (29% would donate), eyes post mortem (35%), embryos (44%), spare eggs (48%) and sperm (58%). Regarding the use of samples, there were concerns over animal research (34%), research conducted outside the UK (35%), and research conducted by pharmaceutical companies (56%), although education and discussion were found to alleviate such concerns.ConclusionsThere is a high level of public support and willingness to donate HBSs for biomedical research. Underlying concerns exist regarding the use of certain types of HBSs and conditions under which they are used. Improved education and more controlled forms of consent for sensitive samples may mitigate such concerns.

Project description:ObjectiveEffective Skills to Empower Effective Men (ESTEEM) represents the first intervention to address the psychological pathways through which minority stress undermines young sexual minority men's (SMM's) mental and sexual health using transdiagnostic cognitive-behavioral therapy. This study compared the efficacy of ESTEEM against two existing interventions.MethodParticipants were young HIV-negative SMM (N = 254; ages = 18-35; 67.2% racial/ethnic minority) experiencing a depression, anxiety, and/or stress-/trauma-related disorder and past-90-day HIV transmission risk behavior. After completing HIV testing and counseling, participants were randomized to receive 10-session ESTEEM (n = 100); 10-session community-based LGBQ-affirmative counseling (n = 102); or only HIV testing and counseling (n = 52).ResultsFor the primary outcome of any HIV transmission risk behavior at 8 months, ESTEEM was not significantly associated with greater reduction compared to HIV testing and counseling (risk ratio [RR] = 0.89, p = .52). Supportive analyses of the frequency of HIV transmission risk behavior at 8 months showed a nonsignificant difference between ESTEEM compared to HIV testing and counseling (RR = 0.69) and LGBQ-affirmative counseling (RR = 0.62). For secondary outcomes (e.g., depression, anxiety, substance use, suicidality, number of mental health diagnoses) at 8 months, ESTEEM had a larger effect size than the two comparison conditions, but these comparisons did not reach statistical significance when adjusting for the false discovery rate. Observed effect sizes for condition comparisons were smaller than the effect sizes used to power the study. In exploratory analyses, ESTEEM showed promise for reducing comorbidity.ConclusionsBecause the control conditions were associated with stronger effects than anticipated, and given the heterogeneous nature of transdiagnostic outcomes, the study possessed insufficient power to statistically detect the consistently small-to-moderate benefit of ESTEEM compared to the two control conditions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Dataset Information

Gay and Bisexual Men's Perceptions of the Donation and Use of Human Biological Samples for Research: A Qualitative Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets