Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39316287›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2024

Ethical, Psychological and Social Un/certainties in the Face of Deemed Consent for Organ Donation in England.

Laura L Machin, Elizabeth Wrench, Jessie Cooper, Heather Dixon, Mark Wilkinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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.

Laura L Machin *Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK. l.machin@lancaster.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6717-959X
Elizabeth Wrench *Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Jessie CooperCity, University of London, London, UK.
Heather DixonLancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Fulwood, UK.
Mark WilkinsonUniversity Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust, Kendal, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deemed consent legislation for deceased organ donation was introduced in England in 2020, and is considered a vital part of the new UK NHS Blood and Transplant's 10-year strategy to increase consent for organ donation. Despite the legislation containing safeguards to protect the public, the introduction of deemed consent creates ethical, psychological and social un/certainties for healthcare professionals in their practice. In this paper, we offer insights into healthcare professionals' perspectives on deemed consent, drawn from interview data with 24 healthcare professionals in an NHS Trust in England, prior to the introduction of the legislation. Whilst participants supported deemed consent in principle, they were concerned that it would present a threat to the nature of donation as a 'gift'; the notion of informed consent (or non-consent); and the autonomy of donors, their relatives, and their own roles as health professionals, posing dilemmas for practice. We argue that healthcare professionals present themselves as guardians of potential (non)donors and thus as having ethics and integrity in their own practice. We draw conclusions around the values and principles that matter to healthcare professionals when contemplating consent in deceased donation which will be useful for organ donation committees and ethics forums.

Indexed as

Informed ConsentTissue and Organ ProcurementEnglandHealth PersonnelHumansInterviews as TopicPersonal AutonomyState MedicineTissue DonorsDeceased organ donationDeemed consentDonation valuesFamily vetoOpt-outUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID39316287
PMCPMC11532317

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.