ReviewThe Journal of clinical ethics2016
Ethical Considerations of Whole-Eye Transplantation.
Review in The Journal of clinical ethics, 2016. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is There an Increasing Interest in Vascular Composite Allotransplantation? A Search Trends Analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Visual Neurorestoration: An Expert Review of Current Strategies for Restoring Vision in Humans.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Clinical and Scientific Considerations for Whole Eye Transplantation: An Ophthalmologist's Perspective.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Whole-eye transplantation: Current challenges and future perspectives.World journal of transplantation · 2024Review
- Cellular Mechanisms of Rejection of Optic and Sciatic Nerve Transplants: An Observational Study.Transplantation direct · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Whole eye transplantation (WET) remains experimental. Long presumed impossible, recent scientific advances regarding WET suggest that it may become a clinical reality. However, the ethical implications of WET as an experimental therapeutic strategy remain largely unexplored. This article evaluates the ethical considerations surrounding WET as an emerging experimental treatment for vision loss. A thorough review of published literature pertaining to WET was performed; ethical issues were identified during review of the articles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27045309PMC5342904W2412513921What 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.