Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22396872›Full record

ArticleAging and disease2011

Aging and transplantation - a topic for biomedicine or bioethics?

William J Hubbard, Nassrin Dashti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Aging and disease, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Organ donation after death in Ontario: a population-based cohort study.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2013
    Article
  6. 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

2 authors.

William J HubbardUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Department of Surgery, Center for Surgical Research and.
Nassrin Dashti

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aged patient stands at the nexus of significant biomedical and bioethical issues in transplantation. This in itself can be seen as a microcosm of an imminent global tempest, stemming from expanding numbers and longer lives of the aged population. As a candidate for receiving organ and tissue transplants, the geriatric patient is challenging because they present unique physiology for medical management. As organ and tissue donors, the aged are perceived of as providing "marginal" organs, which drives the fear that the graft will fail before the recipient. Such difficulties lead inexorably to several unique bioethical considerations for transplantation with this population. The thorny conundrums for society hinge on fairness versus discrimination based on age, played out under the enormous and probably intractable problem of severe donor organ shortages. Fortunately, recent findings offer some rather unexpected new and favorable prospects. Notably, aged donors can provide organs with good, lifesaving function, even though there are nonetheless age-related compromises present. On the other side of the coin, there is less doubt that recipients can have their lives extended with high quality through transplantation. Here they benefit from some (counterintuitively) positive attributes for aging, such as reduced immune function, making immunosuppression less rigorous. Finally, the pressure of organ and tissue shortages plus the lifting of bans on embryonic stem cell research have portents for an explosive alternative to transplantation of adult organs. Stem cells also lend credibility to prospects for realizing regenerative medicine, assuming ethical and religious concerns can be satisfied.

Indexed as

Adult Stem CellAgingBioethicsDonorEmbryonic Stem CellImmunosenescenceImmunosuppressionRecipientTransplant

Identifiers

PMID22396872
PMCPMC3295047

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.