Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20380726›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2010

The use of personalized medicine for patient selection for renal transplantation: physicians' views on the clinical and ethical implications.

Marianne Dion-Labrie, Marie-Chantal Fortin, Marie-Josée Hébert, Hubert Doucet

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Communicating About Precision Transplantation Tools.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2024
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Policy Challenges for Organ Allocation in an Era of "Precision Medicine".Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Ethical qualms about genetic prognosis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2016
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Patients' Perspectives of Grafting Materials in Implant Dentistry: A Qualitative Analysis.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
    Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marianne Dion-LabrieGroupe de recherche en bioéthique, Université de Montréal, P,O, Box 6128, Downtown Station, Montreal, Quebec H3C3J7, Canada. marianne.dion-labrie@umontreal.ca
Marie-Chantal Fortin
Marie-Josée Hébert
Hubert Doucet
Hôpital Notre-Dame · CAUniversité de Montréal · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe overwhelming scarcity of organs within renal transplantation forces researchers and transplantation teams to seek new ways to increase efficacy. One of the possibilities is the use of personalized medicine, an approach based on quantifiable and scientific factors that determine the global immunological risk of rejection for each patient. Although this approach can improve the efficacy of transplantations, it also poses a number of ethical questions.

methodsThe qualitative research involved 22 semi-structured interviews with nephrologists involved in renal transplantation, with the goal of determining the professionals' views about calculating the global immunological risk and the attendant ethical issues.

resultsThe results demonstrate a general acceptance of this approach amongst the participants in the study. Knowledge of each patient's immunological risk could improve treatment and the post-graft follow-up. On the other hand, the possibility that patients might be excluded from transplantation poses a significant ethical issue. This approach is not seen as something entirely new, given the fact that medicine is increasingly scientific and evidence-based. Although renal transplantation incorporates scientific data, these physicians believe that there should always be a place for clinical judgment and the physician-patient relationship.

conclusionsThe participants see the benefits of including the calculation of the global immunological risk within transplantation. Such data, being more precise and rigorous, could be of help in their clinical work. However, in spite of the use of such scientific data, a place must be retained for the clinical judgment that allows a physician to make decisions based on medical data, professional expertise and knowledge of the patient. To act in the best interests of the patient is key to whether the calculation of the global immunological risk is employed.

Indexed as

AdultAgedDecision MakingEthics, ClinicalEthics, MedicalFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterdisciplinary CommunicationJudgmentKidney TransplantationMaleMiddle AgedPatient SelectionPhysiciansPrecision Medicine

Identifiers

PMID20380726
PMCPMC2859770
OpenAlexW2085255279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.