ReviewMonash bioethics review
From blood donation to kidney sales: the gift relationship and transplant commercialism.
Review in Monash bioethics review. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- "I am in favour of organ donation, but I feel you should opt-in"-qualitative analysis of the #options 2020 survey free-text responses from NHS staff toward opt-out organ donation legislation in England.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- The Morality of Kidney Sales: When Caring for the Seller's Dignity Has Moral Costs.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2023Article
- Ethics of Buying DNA.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2022Article
- If the Price is Right: The Ethics and Efficiency of Market Solutions to the Organ Shortage.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2020Article
- Pure Altruistic Gift and the Ethics of Transplant Medicine.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In The Gift Relationship, Richard Titmuss argued that the practice of altruistic blood donation fosters social solidarity while markets in blood erode it. This paper considers the implications of this line of argument for the organ market debate. I defend Titmuss' arguments against a number of criticisms and respond to claims that Titmuss' work is not relevant to the context of live donor organ transplantation. I conclude that Titmuss' arguments are more resilient than many advocates of organ markets suggest, and more relevant to the debate than is commonly appreciated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26458365What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.