Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38076226›Full record

SynthesisTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation2023

Psychological Impact of Living Kidney Donation: A Systematic Review by the EAU-YAU Kidney Transplant Working Group.

Valentine Cazauvieilh, Valérie Moal, Thomas Prudhomme, Alessio Pecoraro, Alberto Piana, Riccardo Campi, Vital Hevia, Angelo Territo, Romain Boissier

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Serial Living Solid Organ Donation: An Ethical Analysis.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Transplant Trial Watch.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2024
    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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Valentine CazauvieilhDepartment of Nephrology, La Conception University Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Marseille, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.
Valérie MoalDepartment of Nephrology, La Conception University Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Marseille, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.
Thomas PrudhommeDepartment of Urology, Rangueil University Hospital, Toulouse, France.
Alessio PecoraroUnit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Alberto PianaDepartment of Urology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Riccardo CampiUnit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Vital HeviaUrology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Alcalá University, Madrid, Spain.
Angelo TerritoOncology and Renal Transplant Units, Puigvert's Foundation, Barcelona, Spain.
Romain BoissierDepartment of Urology and Renal Transplantation, La Conception University Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Marseille, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.
University of Florence · ITHôpital Rangueil · FRHospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal · ESMetabolism and Renal Physiology · FRPuigvert Foundation · ESUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We performed a systematic literature review of the psychological impact on donors of living kidney donation. We conducted a literature review in PubMed/Medline according to PRISMA guidelines which included both qualitative (based on interviews) and quantitative studies (based on standardized questionnaire). There were 15 quantitative studies and 8 qualitative studies with 2,732 donors. Given that the methodologies of qualitative and quantitative studies are fundamentally different, we narratively synthetized results of studies according to four axes: quality of life, anxiety/depression, consequences of donation on the donor/recipient relationship, overall satisfaction and regret. The quantitative studies reported that donor quality of life remained unchanged or improved. Donor regret rates were very low and donor-recipient relationships also remained unchanged or improved. Qualitative studies reported more complex donation experiences: one can regret donation and still decide to recommend it as in a social desirability bias. In both study types, donor-recipient relationships were closer but qualitative studies reported that post-donation rebonding was required. The qualitative studies therefore highlighted the psychological complexity of donation for donors, showing that living donation impacts the donor's life whether it is successful or not. A better understanding of the impact of donation on donors could provide better care for donors.

Indexed as

Kidney TransplantationEmotionsHumansKidneyLiving DonorsQuality of Lifeanxietydepressionliving kidney donorsquality of liferegret

Identifiers

PMID38076226
PMCPMC10703979
OpenAlexW4388976424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.