Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31122708›Full record

ArticleKidney international2019

Opt-out legislations: the mysterious viability of the false.

Rafael Matesanz, Beatriz Domínguez-Gil

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Approaching the Families of Potential Deceased Organ Donors: An Overview of Regulations and Practices in Council of Europe Member States.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Nudging to donate organs: do what you like or like what we do?Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Assessing Global Organ Donation Policies: Opt-In vs Opt-Out.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Rafael MatesanzSpanish National Transplant Organisation (ONT), Madrid, Spain. Electronic address: rafmatesanz@yahoo.es.
Beatriz Domínguez-GilSpanish National Transplant Organisation (ONT), Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is frequently assumed that opt-out legislations set down a more favorable scenario to organ donation than do opt-in legislations. However, there are no clear examples of countries with a real sustained increase in organ donation after modifying the law. Arshad et al. performed a comparison that shows no significant differences between countries with these 2 legal systems. Health care providers must focus on actual barriers to increasing organ donation rather than on presumed consent alone.

Indexed as

Organ TransplantationTissue and Organ ProcurementHealth PersonnelHumansPresumed Consent

Identifiers

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.