ArticleAcute medicine & surgery
Use of an eligibility checklist on arrival of emergency room as a registry system for corneal donation-A 9-year retrospective cohort study.
Article in Acute medicine & surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to evaluate whether the use of an eligibility checklist uncovered potential corneal donors among deceased outpatients and increased the donation. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we applied the eligibility checklist to nearly all outpatients (age ≥ 18 y/o) who were transferred to our emergency department and identified as deceased between 2012 and 2020. Whether the use of the checklist contributed to the increase in corneal donation was examined, and the reasons for refusal of the donation were also evaluated. Furthermore, yearly changes in the number of the donation were assessed, with the data obtained before initiation of the checklist in 2010-2011 as references. The primary outcome was the number of corneal donors, with yearly changes in donation numbers assessed using data from 2010 to 2011 as a reference before the checklist was introduced. Results: Among 1776 outpatients to whom the eligibility checklist was applied, 1169 patients were regarded as potential donors. Of them, 126 families gave consent and 80 patients finally donated cornea; medical diseases as a cause of death were less likely to retract donation offer (OR = 0.31 [95% CI: 0.09-0.99]). The number of corneal donors in 2010-2011 corresponded to 1.6% of the deceased outpatients but increased since the checklist was introduced the total number of donors reached 87 (4.3%) during 2012-2020. Conclusion: A routine use of the eligibility checklist at the initial interview will reinforce the awareness of corneal donation among the families of patients and contribute to the increased number of corneal donors.
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.