ArticlePloS one2020
Corneal donation for research versus for transplantation: A-year prospective study of acceptance rates in a French University Hospital.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Corneal endothelial cell therapy: feasibility of cell culture from corneas stored in organ culture.Cell and tissue banking · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fresh corneal donation is essential for basic and preclinical research, but more unknown to public and the medical teams than donation for transplantation: it may raise concerns. We prospectively compared the acceptance rates and the characteristics of targeted corneal donation for research versus donation for transplantation during one year. The Agence de la Biomédecine authorized us to procure fresh corneas targeted for research, only from the donors with medical contraindications for transplantation, in order not to increase grafts shortage. Three nurses from the hospital coordination team of Saint-Etienne University Hospital, obtained consent for research and transplantation in parallel, screening all intra-hospital deaths cases, following standard protocol to check no refusal from families, despite the French opt-out system. They contacted 127 families for research and 244 for transplantation, in 71% of cases by telephone. Consent was obtained in 62% of cases for research and 54% for transplantation (P = 0.135). The main contraindication for transplantation was the cognitive disorders (66%) followed by the blood cancers (8%). This new specific activity, providing new source of fresh corneas for research immediately usable without any eyebank storage steps, didn't reduce the number of corneas procured for transplantation versus previous years (P = 0.998). Donors in the research group were 10 years older (P<0.001) without difference regarding endothelial cell quality (P = 0.071), allowing maximal clinical relevance for protocols using these fresh human scientific corneas provided by targeted donation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.