Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33575991›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2021

Family veto in organ donation: the experiences of Organ and Tissue Donation Coordinators in Ontario.

Samantha J Anthony, Jia Lin, Sarah J Pol, Linda Wright, Sonny Dhanani

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. First-Person Authorization and Family Objections to Organ Donation.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Much ado about the family veto.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Samantha J AnthonyChild Health Evaluative Sciences, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada. samantha.anthony@sickkids.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1800-2333
Jia LinChild Health Evaluative Sciences, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8691-3358
Sarah J PolChild Health Evaluative Sciences, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1883-1753
Linda WrightCanadian Donation and Transplantation Research Program, Edmonton, AB, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0380-0380
Sonny DhananiCanadian Donation and Transplantation Research Program, Edmonton, AB, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0780-8291
Hospital for Sick Children · CAUniversity of Toronto · CAChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn Ontario, an individual's registered wish for organ donation is legally valid consent following death. Family veto occurs when the deceased donor's substitute decision-maker (SDM) overrides this consent to donate, evoking a legal and ethical conflict. The objective of this study was to examine the experiences of Organ and Tissue Donation Coordinators (OTDCs) working with SDMs who vetoed a deceased donor's consent for organ donation.

methodsQualitative focus groups were conducted with ten OTDCs in Ontario, Canada who reported experience with family veto. An interpretative phenomenological approach informed data analysis. Themes emerged through team consensus and were further refined through collaborative and reflexive engagement.

resultsFour themes emerged regarding family veto: 1) the significance of the OTDC role, 2) emotional distress and the "understandable" family veto, 3) barriers contributing to family veto, and 4) strategies towards a culture of organ donation. Findings highlighted the importance of patient advocacy in the OTDC role, while revealing the emotional distress of experiencing family veto. OTDCs identified timing and healthcare providers' perceived ambivalence toward organ donation as critical barriers to family authorization. Value-positive language, role reframing, and increased education were offered as strategies to address these barriers and reduce family veto.

conclusionThis study highlights important considerations about organ donation authorization processes in Ontario. Findings support practice changes towards reducing family veto and further research nationally. Collaborations with key stakeholders are warranted to align healthcare practices, donation policies, and education initiatives towards a shared goal of increasing organ donation.

Indexed as

Decision MakingTissue and Organ ProcurementFamilyHumansOntarioTissue Donorsfamily vetointensive care unitspatient-care teamqualitative researchtissue and organ procurementtissue donors

Identifiers

PMID33575991
PMCPMC7878166
OpenAlexW3126690014

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.