ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025
Serial Living Solid Organ Donation: An Ethical Analysis.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIt is possible in many countries to not only become a living solid organ donor, but to become a serial living solid organ donor, a process in which an individual subsequently donates a liver lobe after donating a kidney, or vice versa. The major ethical issues that surround uncompensated living single solid organ donation (the doctor's duties to respect autonomy, of beneficence, and of non-maleficence) have been well described, and this process is generally considered ethically permissible if the donor has sufficient health, and if their decision is voluntary, fully informed, and made in the absence of coercion. However, the landscape of ethical issues pertaining to serial living solid organ donation has so far gone unexamined.
methodsThis paper conducts an ethical analysis, using the ethical framework of Principlism, of the ethical issues that surround serial living solid organ donation.
findingsSerial living solid organ donation not only repeats the ethical issues that pertain to single organ donation, but also compounds some of them. Respect for autonomy in serial donation is challenged by uncertainty of the long-term risks of serial donation, and serial donors potentially face an increased risk of coercion from those in need of an organ and other third parties. The removal of a second healthy organ in serial donation poses greater risk to non-maleficence than single organ donation because the enduring effects of the previous surgery increase surgical risk. The effect of serial donation on beneficence is currently unknown. Serial donation also generates the potentially novel ethical issue of the donation being motivated by pathological altruism (the act thereby being inspired by selfish concerns), which threatens autonomy, non-maleficence, and beneficence. DISCUSSION: Research is required to understand the long-term risks to physical health and psychological wellbeing of serial donation to promote autonomy, non-maleficence, and beneficence. Additionally, the understanding of pathological altruism as a motivating factor for living organ donation should be increased, and the psychological assessment of potential living donors should be vigilant to detect this motivation.
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.