ArticlePEC innovation2022
Findings of living donation experiences shared on a digital storytelling platform: A thematic analysis.
Article in PEC innovation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Informing transplant candidate and donor education in living kidney donation: mapping educational needs through a rapid review.BMC nephrology · 2025Review
- Article
- Living Kidney Donation: A Narrative Review of Mid- and Long-term Psychosocial Outcomes.Transplantation · 2025Review
- Technology-Enabled Remote Patient Monitoring and Education to Improve Kidney Transplant Knowledge, Access, and Post-Transplant Care: A Narrative Review.Current transplantation reports · 2025Article
- Experiences of Unanticipated Outcomes Among Ethnically Diverse Living Kidney Donors: A Qualitative Pilot Study.Clinical transplantation · 2024Article
- Living Kidney Donation Stories and Advice Shared Through a Digital Storytelling Library: A Qualitative Thematic Analysis.Kidney medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To identify common experiences and emotional changes shared by living donors and kidney recipients about their living donation experiences on a digital storytelling platform. Methods: 82 donors and 36 recipients submitted prompt-guided videos to the platform. Two coders analyzed transcripts for motivations, common themes, and emotions expressed. Results: Storytellers shared their stories to advocate for living donation and contribute to others facing similar challenges. Pre-surgery, recipients recalled their dialysis experiences and how they sought living donors while donors discussed their motivations and common fears. Post-surgery, recipients discussed changes in their relationship with the donor and quality life, while donors described how they benefited. Learning they needed a transplant, recipients reported feeling fear (33.3%) while donors felt sadness (48.8%). Post-transplant, recipients and donors reported feeling happiness (85.4%, 38.9%) and relief (29.3%, 22.2%). Conclusion: Online digital storytelling libraries increase access to real-life living donation experiences. Since stories are highly personal, additional living donor kidney transplant risk-benefit education is needed. Innovation: Stories can supplement traditional education and be incorporated into advocacy efforts; campaigns could capitalize upon the personal aspect of stories to gently introduce and encourage living kidney donation among the general public.
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.