Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40843144›Full record

ArticleF1000Research2022

Changing the method of consent to increase the numbers of deceased donors in Saudi Arabia: the autonomy paradox.

Deema Al Shawan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Deema Al ShawanPublic Health, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-4571-3832

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In Saudi Arabia, the gap between the demand for and availability of organs persists, with a total of 13,731 patients on the waiting list in 2019. Family refusal is a major obstacle limiting donation since their consent must be obtained prior to the retrieval of organs. The cause of family refusal is mainly due to their lack of knowledge of their loved ones' wish to become a donor. This paper aimed to compare three systems of obtaining consent in terms of effectiveness, respect for autonomy, and the cultural role of families in Saudi Arabia to ensure feasibility and effectiveness in increasing the number of donors. Policy alternatives and implications: The consent systems include informed consent, presumed consent, and mandated choice. The mandated choice policy might be the optimal solution since it is the most likely to balance the respect for individual autonomy and the cultural role of families in Saudi Arabia. Conclusions and recommendations: Mandated choice could be an option that ensures respect for personal autonomy. Nevertheless, more research should be conducted to support adopting this policy in the Saudi context. Additionally, a recommendation to decision makers is to utilize the Tawakkalna app to send alerts to the next of kin when a user registers as a donor with the user's consent.

Indexed as

Informed ConsentPersonal AutonomyTissue and Organ ProcurementTissue DonorsHumansSaudi Arabiacadavericconsentdonationdonorsfamily consentOrganTawakkalnatransplantation

Identifiers

PMID40843144
PMCPMC12365590

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.