Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Trigger Factors in Transfusion Medicine pp 115–131Cite as

Facts, Fears and Formulas about Blood Transfusions: on the Assessment, Acceptance and Control of Risks

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Developments in Hematology and Immunology ((DIHI,volume 31))

Abstract

Giving blood and receiving others’ blood are intimate things that easily raise sensitivities. A patient in need must trust the doctor who hopes that the donor is a responsible person. When there is doubt, there is risk. And risk-taking demands a balancing of risks against expected benefits. For a small or an anonymous benefit, you don’t take a large risk. When the benefits are visibly large, you may get daring. But a blood recipient has little control, and the donor is not in charge either. So: how much fear is reasonable, how much trust is required, and what should you know to decide what to do?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Cognitive processes and soietal risk taking. In: Carroll JS, Payne JW (eds). Cognition and social behavior. Potomomac MD: Erlbaum L. Also in Jungermann H, de Zeeuw G (eds). Decision making and change in human affairs. Reidel, Dordrecht/Boston 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Behavioral decision theory perspectives on risk and safety. Acta Psychologica 1984;56:183–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vlek Ch, Stallen PJ. Rational and personal aspects of risk. Acta Psychol 1980;45:273–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yates JF (ed). Risk-taking behavior. Wiley, Chichester UK/New York 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Quadrel MJ. Risk perception and communication. Ann Rev Public Health 1993;14:183–203.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Krimsky S, Golding D (eds). Social theories of risk. New York, Plenum 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bayerische Rück (eds). Risk is a construct; perceptions of risk perception. Knesebeck, Munich 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gezondheidsraad. Risk is more than just a number. Health Council of The Netherlands, The Hague, 1996, 120 pages. (Complete Dutch version: Risico, meer dan een getal, also available).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lowrance WW. Of acceptable risk; science and the determination of safety. W. Kaufmann, Los Altos (CA) 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rowe WD. An anatomy of risk. Wiley, New York 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kaplan S, Garrick BJ. On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Anal 1981;1:11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Coombs CH. A review of the mathematical psychology of risk and risk taking. University of Michigan, Michigan Mathematical Psychology Program Report MMPP 1972:72–76.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Libby R, Fishburn PC. Behavioral models of risk taking in business decisions: A survey and evaluation. J Account Res 1977; Autumn:272–92.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vlek CAJ. Beslissen over risico-acceptatie/Decision making about risk acceptance. Rapport in Hoofdlijnen/Executive Summary. 1990, 52 pp. Gezondheidsraad/Health Council, The Hague. Report nr A 90/10H, abt. 80 pages. (Main report nr. A 90/10, 236 pp in Dutch).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S, Read S, Combs B. How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes toward technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences 1978;9:127–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Facts and fears: Understanding perceived risk. In: Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A. Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge Univ. Press, London/New York, 1982:463–89.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Vlek Ch, Stallen PJ. Judging risks and benefits in the small and in the large. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 1981;28:235–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Renn O. Technology, risk and public perception. J Appl System Anal/Zeitschrift für Angewandte Systemanalyse 1983;4:50–65.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kuyper H, Vlek Ch. Contrasting risk judgments among interest groups. Acta Psychol 1984;56:205–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kraus NN, Slovic P. Taxonomic analysis of perceived risk: Modeling individual and group perceptions within homogeneous hazard domains. Risk Anal 1988;8:435–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gardner GT, Gould LC. Public perceptions of the risks and benefits of technology. Risk Anal 1989;9:225–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Otway HJ, von Winterfeldt. Beyond acceptable risk: On the social acceptability of technologies. Policy Sciences 1982;14:241–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hohenemser C, Kates RW, Slovic P. The nature of technological hazard. Science 1983;220:378–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hansson SO. Dimensions of risk. Risk Anal 1989;9:107–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Jungermann H. Inhalte und Konzepte der Risiko-Kommunikation. In: Jungermann H, Rohrmann B, Wiedemann PM (eds). Risiko-Konzepte, Risiko-Konflikte, Risiko-Kommunikation. Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Jülich 1990:309–27.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Vlek Ch, Keren GB. Behavioral decision theory and environmental risk management: Assessment and resolution of four ‘survival’ dilemmas. Acta Psychol 1992;80: 249–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Buss DM, Craik KJ. Contemporary world views: Personal and policy implications. J Appl Soc Psychol 1983;13:259–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Peri-operative red blood cell transfusion. NIH Consensus development conference. Bethesda (MD), National Institutes of Health. JAMA 1988;260:2700–05.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dodd RY. Adverse consequences of blood transfusion: Quantitative risk estimates. In: Nance ST (ed). Blood supply: Risks, perceptions and prospects for the future. American Association of Blood Banks, Bethesda, MD 1994:1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kalbfleisch JD, Lawless JF. Estimating the incubation time distribution and expected number of cases of transfusion-associated acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Transfusion 1989;29:672–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Bove JR. Statement on AIDS and blood transfusion. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations and Human Resources of the House Committee on Government Operations. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Vlek CAJ, Wagenaar WA. Judgment and decision under uncertainty. In: Michon JA, Eijkman EG, de Klerk LFW (eds). Handbook of psychonomics. Vol II. North Holland, Amsterdam 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hendrickx L, Vlek Ch, Oppewal H. Relative importance of scenario information and frequency information in the judgment of risk. Acta Psychol 1989;72:41–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Howell WC, Burnett SA. Uncertainty measurement: A cognitive taxonomy. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 1978;22:45–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Variants of uncertainty. Cognition 1982;11:143–57.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Merkhofer MW. Decision science and social risk management. Reidel, Boston/Dordrecht 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Edwards W, Newman JR. Multi-attribute evaluation. Sage, Baverly Hills (CA) 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W. Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge University Press, New York/Cambridge (UK) 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Yoon KP, Hwang C-L. Multiple attribute decision making; an introduction. Sage Publications Series, London/New Delhi 1995;7:104.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Fischhoff B. Setting standards: A systematic approach to managing public health and safety risks. Management Science 1984;30:823–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. ICRP. Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Pergamon, Oxford. Annals of the ICRP 1 1977;26.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Vlek CAJ. A multi-level, multi-stage and multi-attribute perspective on risk assessment, decision-making and risk control. Risk, Decision and Policy 1996;1(in press).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Covello VT, von Winterfeldt D, Slovic P. Risk communication: A review of the literature. Risk Abstracts 1986;3:171–82.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Wiedemann P, Rohrmann, Jungermann H. Das Forschungsgebiet ‘Risiko-Kommunikation’. In: Jungermann H, Rohrmann B, Wiedemann P (eds). Risiko-Konzepte, Risiko-Konflikte, Risiko-Kommunikation. Monographien des Forschungszentrums Jülich, Programmagruppe Mensch, Umwelt, Techniek, 1990;Band 3.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Cvetkovich G, Vlek Ch, Earle TC. Designing technological hazard information programs: Towards a model of risk-adaptive decision making. In: Vlek Ch, Cvetkovich (eds). Social decision methodology for technological projects. Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht/Boston 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Stern PC. Learning through conflict: A realistic strategy for risk communication. Policy Sciences 1991;24:99–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Los APM, Achterhof L, Tijmstra TJ, Suurmeyer TPBM, Smit Sibinga CTh. Informing blood donors about AIDS and risk factors: Reactions to information provided in a regional blood bank in The Netherlands. AIDS 1989;3:439–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Menitove JE. Perception of risk. In: Nance ST (ed). Blood supply: Risks, perceptions and prospects for the future. American Association of Blood Banks, Bethesda, MD 1994:45–59.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Smit Sibinga CTh, Das PC, Heiniger HJ (eds). Good manufacturing practice in transfusion medicine. Kluwer Academic Press. Dordrecht/Boston 1994.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. C. A. J. Vlek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Red Cross Blood Bank Noord-Nederland, The Netherlands

    C. Th. Smit Sibinga  & P. C. Das  & 

  2. Yale New Haven Hospital Blood Bank, New Haven, CT, USA

    E. L. Snyder (chairmain) (chairmain)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1996 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Vlek, C.A.J. (1996). Facts, Fears and Formulas about Blood Transfusions: on the Assessment, Acceptance and Control of Risks. In: Sibinga, C.T.S., Das, P.C., Snyder, E.L. (eds) Trigger Factors in Transfusion Medicine. Developments in Hematology and Immunology, vol 31. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1287-1_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1287-1_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-8550-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-1287-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation