ArticleNeurocritical care2026
Neurocritical Care Experience and Attitudes Related to Organ Donation in the USA.
Article in Neurocritical care, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere has been a surge in attention to ethical controversies associated with organ donation in the USA. The Neurocritical Care Society (NCS) Ethics Committee sought to understand member experiences and attitudes related to organ donation in the USA.
methodsWe designed a survey of members who practice in the USA and have interacted with an organ procurement organization (OPO)/potential donor. The survey was disseminated by NCS from 1 June 2025 to 1 September 2025. Free-text responses were reviewed to identify themes.
resultsOf 2204 NCS members in the USA, there were 71 respondents who completed the survey and 37 respondents who provided free-text comments. Experiences and attitudes varied, but 59% of respondents indicated that they generally think that communication between the OPO and patient surrogates about donation after brain death/death by neurologic criteria seems appropriate, and 34% indicated that they generally think that communication between the OPO and patient surrogates regarding donation after cardiac death/death by circulatory-respiratory criteria (DCD) seems appropriate. Themes included (1) the need to improve education for the treatment team about organ donation; (2) blurred boundaries between patient care and care directed toward organ donation; (3) misalignment between OPOs and treatment team priorities; (4) loss of trust between patient surrogates and the treatment team based on interactions with OPOs; (5) suboptimal timing of communication between OPOs and patient surrogates; (6) concerns regarding a potential lack of transparency, empathy, and cultural sensitivity in communication between OPOs and patient surrogates; (7) opportunities for improvement in preoperative care before donation and palliation after extubation for DCD; and (8) changes in willingness to donate organs based on interactions with OPOs.
conclusionsAlthough the results from this survey reflect the experience and attitudes of a small percentage of NCS members in the USA, they indicate that there are opportunities for improvement in organ donation processes. Survey results will guide the NCS Ethics Committee in supporting members navigating ethical controversies related to organ donation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41634498What 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.