Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38886889›Full record

ReviewTransplantation2025

Living Kidney Donation: A Narrative Review of Mid- and Long-term Psychosocial Outcomes.

Emma K Massey, Andrew D Rule, Arthur J Matas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Transplantation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Evaluation and Counseling of Living Kidney Donor Candidates.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Living kidney donation prior to euthanasia: medical, psychological and ethical considerations.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

3 authors.

Emma K MasseyErasmus Medical Center Transplant Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Internal Medicine, Rotterdam, Zuid Holland, the Netherlands.
Andrew D RuleDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Arthur J MatasDepartment of Surgery, Transplantation Division, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

Funding

Outcomes in living kidney donors over 50 years compared to a healthy matched contemporaneous non-donor cohort from the same geographical regionR01DK125431 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI ARTHUR J MATAS, ANDREW David RULE · 2020 to 2026
$3.4M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK125431
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Living kidney donors make a significant contribution to alleviating the organ shortage. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of mid- and long-term (≥12 mo) living donor psychosocial outcomes and highlight areas that have been understudied and should be immediately addressed in both research and clinical practice. We conducted a narrative review by searching 3 databases. A total of 206 articles were included. Living donors can be divided into those who donate to an emotionally or genetically related person, the so-called directed donors, or to an emotionally or genetically unrelated recipient, the so-called nondirected donors. The most commonly investigated (bio)psychosocial outcome after living donation was health-related quality of life. Other generic (bio)psychological outcomes include specific aspects of mental health such as depression, and fatigue and pain. Social outcomes include financial and employment burdens and problems with insurance. Donation-specific psychosocial outcomes include regret, satisfaction, feelings of abandonment and unmet needs, and benefits of living kidney donation. The experience of living donation is complex and multifaceted, reflected in the co-occurrence of both benefits and burden after donation. Noticeably, no interventions have been developed to improve mid- or long-term psychosocial outcomes among living donors. We highlight areas for methodological improvement and identified 3 areas requiring immediate attention from the transplant community in both research and clinical care: (1) recognizing and providing care for the minority of donors who have poorer long-term psychosocial outcomes after donation, (2) minimizing donation-related financial burden, and (3) studying interventions to minimize long-term psychosocial problems.

Indexed as

Kidney TransplantationLiving DonorsNephrectomyQuality of LifeEmotionsHumansMental HealthTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID38886889
PMCPMC11652709

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.