ArticleClinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.)2026
Variability in UK Body Donation Information: A Comparison of Bequeathal Information and Consent Forms With Recommendations for Standardization.
Article in Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 2026. 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.
- Ethical-legal vulnerability in body procurement across national contexts.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of human donor bodies for anatomical examination in the United Kingdom is regulated by the Human Tissue Authority (England, Wales, and Northern Ireland) and His Majesty's Inspector of Anatomy for Scotland. This study aimed to assess the variability of information provided to body donors and the associated consent forms across UK anatomy institutions. A total of 24 consent forms and information booklets were collected from all body donation programs across the UK. Building on previous research, each document was assessed against a checklist covering general information about the donation process, purposes and locations of body use, consent requirements, disposition of remains, and accessibility. The analysis revealed significant heterogeneity in the information provided. The findings suggest a need for standardization of body donation information and consent forms to ensure they meet ethical requirements for informed consent and to improve accessibility and inclusivity. Recommendations include ensuring consistency between information provided and consent forms, requiring confirmation of reading the information, standardizing age limits and medical condition statements, providing clear information for next of kin, and ensuring ethical oversight by institutional committees. Further research is needed on donors' perspectives regarding specific aspects of the donation process. These recommendations are proposed to provide a more consistent approach to sharing information about body donation, ultimately suggesting the development of a single, collaboratively produced form and information pack to minimize customization (and thus omissions).
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.