ArticleTransplantation direct2021
The 3-T Model of Informed Consent for Nonstandard Risk Donors: A Proposal for Transplant Clinical Practice.
Article in Transplantation direct, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Refusal Rates to Organ Donation in Intensive Care Units Among Immigrant Populations in Italy.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023Article
- Liver transplantation from active COVID-19 donors: Is it ethically justifiable?Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society · 2022Article
- Shared decision-making and disclosure of adverse events: critical aspects for the quality and safety of kidney transplant practice.Journal of nephrology · 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
18 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe risk of disease transmission from nonstandard risk donors (NSRDs) is low, and outcomes are similar or better relative to transplants performed with standard criteria donors. However, NSRDs have posed new ethical challenges to the informed consent (IC) process. Based on the shared decision-making model, coinciding with the 3 main timings of the IC process ([1] pretransplant assessments and waiting list registration, [2] time on the waiting list, and [3] time of the organ offer), we put forward a model (3-T Model) to summarize the knowledge on IC for NSRDs and to deliver conceptual and practical support to transplant providers on this emergent issue.
methodsWe searched
resultsEach of the 3 timings carries special ethical significance and entails well-defined duties for transplant providers relative to patient involvement and information of the benefits and risks associated with NSRDs. Based on our framework, experience, and interpretation of the literature, we put forward a list of recommendations to combine standardization (ie, timing, content, and degree of patient participation) and individualization of IC.
conclusionsThe 3-T Model may enable the prevention of physicians' arbitrariness and the promotion of patient-centered care. Future studies will assess the effectiveness of the 3-T Model in transplant clinical practice.
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.