Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27500253›Full record

ArticleTransplantation direct2016

Trafficking in Human Beings for the Purpose of Organ Removal and the Ethical and Legal Obligations of Healthcare Providers.

Timothy Caulfield, Wilma Duijst, Mike Bos, Iris Chassis, Igor Codreanu, Gabriel Danovitch, John Gill, Ninoslav Ivanovski, Milbert Shin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transplantation direct, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Curbing transplant tourism: Canadian physicians and the law.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2016
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

9 authors.

Timothy CaulfieldHealth Law Institute, University of Alberta, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Wilma DuijstRadboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Mike BosEurotransplant International Foundation, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Iris ChassisNational Fraud Unit, Israeli Police, Israel.
Igor CodreanuRenal Foundation, Moldova.
Gabriel DanovitchUniversity of California, Berkeley, CA.
John GillUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Ninoslav IvanovskiUniversity of St. Cyril and Methodius, Republic of Macedonia.
Milbert ShinUnited Nations, Republic of Liberia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physicians and other health care professionals seem well placed to play a role in the monitoring and, perhaps, in the curtailment of the trafficking in human beings for the purpose of organ removal. They serve as important sources of information for patients and may have access to information that can be used to gain a greater understanding of organ trafficking networks. However, well-established legal and ethical obligations owed to their patients can create challenging policy tensions that can make it difficult to implement policy action at the level of the physician/patient. In this article, we explore the role-and legal and ethical obligations-of physicians at 3 key stages of patient interaction: the information phase, the pretransplant phase, and the posttransplant phase. Although policy challenges remain, physicians can still play a vital role by, for example, providing patients with a frank disclosure of the relevant risks and harms associated with the illegal organ trade and an honest account of the physician's own moral objections. They can also report colleagues involved in the illegal trade to an appropriate regulatory authority. Existing legal and ethical obligations likely prohibit physicians from reporting patients who have received an illegal organ. However, given the potential benefits that may accrue from the collection of more information about the illegal transactions, this is an area where legal reform should be considered.

Identifiers

PMID27500253
PMCPMC4946496

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.