ArticleClinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN2022
A Qualitative Content Analysis of Comments on Press Articles on Deemed Consent for Organ Donation in Canada.
Article in Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring Attitudes to Lung Cancer Screening in England: An Inductive Content Analysis of Online Commentary Following Media Announcement of a National Lung Cancer Screening Programme.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- High-Functioning Deceased Donor Kidney Transplant System Characteristics: The British Columbia Experience With an Opt-In System.Kidney medicine · 2024Article
- Qualitative Content and Discourse Analysis Comparing the Current Consent Systems for Deceased Organ Donation in Spain and England.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2024Article
- Understanding Public Perspectives on Opt-Out Deceased Donor Transplant Policy: Ethically Obligatory and Practically Necessary.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesIn 2019, two Canadian provinces became the first jurisdictions in North America to pass deemed consent legislation to increase deceased organ donation and transplantation rates. We sought to explore the perspectives of the deemed consent legislation for organ donation in Canada from the viewpoint of individuals commenting on press articles. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In this qualitative descriptive study, we extracted public comments regarding deemed consent from online articles published by four major Canadian news outlets between January 2019 and July 2020. A total of 4357 comments were extracted from 35 eligible news articles. Comments were independently analyzed by two research team members using a conventional content analysis approach.
resultsCommenters' perceptions of the deemed consent legislation for organ donation in Canada predominantly fit within three organizational groups: perceived positive implications of the bills, perceived negative implications of the bills, and key considerations. Three themes emerged within each group that summarized perspectives of the proposed legislation. Themes regarding the perceived positive implications of the bills included majority rules, societal effect, and prioritizing donation. Themes regarding the perceived negative implications of the bills were a right to choose, the potential for abuse and errors, and a possible slippery slope. Improving government transparency and communication, clarifying questions and addressing concerns, and providing evidence for the bills were identified as key considerations.
conclusionsIf deemed consent legislation is meant to increase organ donation and transplantation, addressing public concerns will be important to ensure successful implementation.
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.