Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37197042›Full record

ReviewIndian journal of nephrology

Social Media and Organ Donation: Pros and Cons.

Priti Meena, Vivek B Kute, Vinant Bhargava, Rishita Mondal, Sanjay K Agarwal

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Indian journal of nephrology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Priti MeenaDepartment of Nephrology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Vivek B KuteDepartment of Nephrology, Institute of Kidney Diseases and Research Centre, Dr. HL Trivedi Institute of Transplantation Sciences (IKDRC-ITS), Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.
Vinant BhargavaInstitute of Renal Science, Sir Gangaram Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Rishita MondalDepartment of Nephrology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Sanjay K AgarwalDepartment of Nephrology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar · INInstitute of Transplantation Sciences · INSir Ganga Ram Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Shortage of organ donors is the most important obstacle standing in the way of lifesaving organ transplantation in a myriad of patients suffering from end-stage organ failure. It is vital that the transplant societies and associated appropriate authorities develop strategies to overcome the unmet needs for organ donation. The power of prominent social media (SoMe) platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, which reach millions of people, can increase awareness, provide education, and may ameliorate the pessimism toward organ donation among the general population. Additionally, public solicitation of organs may be helpful for waitlisted candidates for organ transplantation, who cannot find a suitable donor among near relations. However, the use of SoMe for organ donation has several ethical issues. This review attempts to highlight the advantages and limitations of using social media in the context of organ donation for transplantation. Some suggestions on the best utilization of social media platforms for organ donation while balancing ethical considerations have been highlighted here.

Indexed as

CoercionFacebookorgan donationsocial mediatransplantation

Identifiers

PMID37197042
PMCPMC10185012
OpenAlexW4313120534

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.