Engaging community members to ensure culturally specific language is used in research: should I use gay, queer, MSM, or this other new acronym?

Researchers often use terminology to define their participant groups that is rooted in a clinical understanding of the group's shared identity(ies). Such naming often ignores the ways that the individuals who comprise these populations identify themselves. One oft-cited benefit of patient-oriented or community-engaged research is that language is local and relevant to impacted communities. This paper aims to contribute to the literature on how this local and relevant language can best be established. We ask how researchers can identify and implement accurate terminology, even when divergent perspectives exist within the communities involved. We draw from our experience with the Expanding Plasma Donation in Canada study, a community-engaged research study, which explored the views of people impacted by the "men who have sex with men" (MSM) blood donation policies in Canada. We describe the collaborative process through which we came to a consensual naming of this population, the challenges we faced, and a set of guiding principles we used to address them. We did not find an all-encompassing term or acronym that worked for all stages of research. Instead, we offer a set of guiding principles that can aid researchers engaging in a similar process: harm reduction, consent and transparency, collaboration and community involvement, recognition of missing voices, and resisting and/or restructuring oppressive standards.

The words and labels that researchers use to describe the communities they study does not always resonate with the actual members of those communities. Doing research in partnership with members of socially disadvantaged groups can help to ensure that the language used in the research is relevant, accurate, and respectful. Researchers studying issues related to men who have sex with men often struggle with knowing what term to use to describe this group of people. While many people may identify as "gay", "queer", "bisexual", or any other term, there are many men who do not identify with these labels but also have sex with men. Previous research on this topic is usually focused on arguing that a specific term or acronym should be adopted. As part of a larger research program to support more inclusive plasma donation, the current paper describes the process our research team undertook to ethically describe this complex community of diverse men who have sex with men. Rather than choosing one specific label to describe the community members in all situations, we describe a set of guiding principles that can be used to help researchers flexibly navigate language depending on the situation and context.

Navigating imperfect policies to donate plasma: Survey on plasma donation and a pilot plasma donation program among men who have sex with men in Canada.

BACKGROUND: In 2021, Canada implemented a pilot plasma program allowing some sexually active men who have sex with men (including but not limited to gay and bisexual men; gbMSM) to donate plasma. Changes to plasma donation policy could help address inequities in access to plasma donation and increase Canada's domestically collected plasma supply if more gbMSM donate as a result. We aimed to (1) examine views regarding plasma donation and the pilot program prior to implementation and (2) identify modifiable theory-informed predictors of gbMSM's intention to donate plasma. METHODS: We developed, piloted, and disseminated a questionnaire informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). We recruited gbMSM in London (ON) and Calgary (AB) to an anonymous, online cross-sectional survey. RESULTS: A total of 246 gbMSM completed the survey. On scales from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), general intention to donate was high (mean = 4.24; SD = 0.94). The pilot program itself was mostly acceptable (mean = 3.71, SD = 1.16), but the intention to donate under the unique requirements of the pilot program was lower than general intention (mean = 3.58; SD = 1.26). Two domains from the theoretical domains framework (TDF) (beliefs about consequences of donating plasma and social influences) were independently associated with general intention to donate. DISCUSSION: The pilot plasma program as an incremental step toward more inclusive policies was mostly viewed as acceptable by the impacted communities. Historical and ongoing exclusions create unique barriers to donation. There are clear opportunities for developing theory-informed interventions to support gbMSM to donate plasma as policies continue to become more inclusive and more become eligible to donate.

Improved access yet inequitable experience: gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men's views of more inclusive criteria for source plasma donation.

BACKGROUND: Canada 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. METHODS: We 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. RESULTS: Twenty-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. CONCLUSION: Findings 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.

Staff perspectives on barriers and enablers to implementing alternative source plasma eligibility criteria for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men.

BACKGROUND: Canadian Blood Services introduced new eligibility criteria that allows some sexually active gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) to donate source plasma, marking a significant change from time-based deferral criteria. We aimed to identify potential barriers and enablers to implementing the new criteria from the perspective of donor center staff. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted Theoretical Domains Framework-informed interviews with staff from two source plasma donation centers in Canada. RESULTS: We completed 28 interviews between June 2020 and April 2021. Three themes representing eight domains captured key tensions. Valuing inclusive eligibility criteria: staff support inclusive criteria; many were concerned the new criteria remained discriminatory. Investing in positive donor experiences: staff wished to foster positive donor experiences; however, they worried gbMSM donors would express anger and disappointment regarding the new criteria, staff would experience unease over using stigmatizing criteria and convey nonverbal cues of discomfort, and recurring plasma donors may behave inappropriately. Supporting education, training, and transparency of eligibility criteria: participants believed providing in-person training (i.e., to explain criteria rationale, address discomfort, practice responding to donor questions) and ensuring donors and the public were well-informed of the upcoming changes would improve implementation. DISCUSSION: Participant views emphasize the importance of supporting staff through training and transparent communication to optimize the delivery of world-class equitable care for a new cohort of donors who have previously been excluded from plasma donation. Findings inform which staff supports to consider to improve implementation as policies continue to shift internationally.