ReviewAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2020
A review of the use of biological mesh products in modern UK surgical practice: a religious and cultural perspective.
Review in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Porcine-derived materials in urology Practical ethical guidance for caring for Muslim and Jewish patients.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026Review
- Consenting for intraoperative use of animal- and human-derived products: a case of the blind leading the blind?Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2026Article
- Jewish Perspectives on Porcine Xenotransplantation: Balancing Religious Ethics and Medical Necessity in Israel.Journal of religion and health · 2026Article
- Islamic reasoning and the use of prohibited medicines among Muslim patients: a qualitative study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- Real world evidence of insulin and biosimilar insulin therapy-Opportunities to improve adherence, outcomes and cost-effectiveness.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Review
- The unseen animal behind medicine: exploring considerations of animal-derived medications and anaesthetics in today's landscape.BJA open · 2025Review
- Review
- Factoring patients' beliefs and values into decisions around anticoagulation: a community-led multi-cycle quality improvement project.Future healthcare journal · 2023Article
- Dentistry in a multicultural society: the impact of animal-based products on person-centred care.British dental journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe UK is an increasingly multicultural society. This change coincides with an increasing use of animal products in medicine and surgery and a change in the UK law of consent. The refusal of Jehovah's Witnesses to accept blood products is well known, but the use of animal products in surgery is a neglected topic. As society becomes more diverse and medicine becomes ever more advanced, there is increasing potential for a mismatch between what is medically possible and what is acceptable from a religious perspective.
methodsSurgical products were identified by searching the literature and contacting manufacturing companies. Literature was identified by using PubMed and OVID (MEDLINE). Religious views were established by contacting national bodies for each group.
findingsThe views of common UK religious groups and the constituent parts of biological meshes are summarised in tables intended to be used as a reference during clinical practice. On an elective basis, the Islamic, Hindu. Sikh and Jain leaders contacted had strong views on avoiding animal derived products. The Christian and Jewish leaders contacted did not. All religious leaders contacted accepted the use of mesh derived from human tissue. All products, including those of porcine and bovine origin, were acceptable to all leaders contacted if the procedure was performed to save life. The highlighting of this issue should prompt earlier consideration and discussion in the surgical planning and the consenting process with all final decisions taken by both the surgeon and the individual patient.
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.