ReviewVox sanguinis2026
Protection of fundamental human rights by improving patient access to plasma-derived therapies and donor health protection.
Review in Vox sanguinis, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe main use of plasma has evolved into market-driven plasma-derived medicinal products (PDMPs), but it still requires donors. Availability of PDMPs in access to care is often considered restrictively, in terms of volumes of plasma required for production and whether or not to remunerate donors. Unfortunately, this leads to an inability to meet today's challenges, both in terms of patient access to treatment and donor protection. MATERIALS AND
methodsHere we review how the current challenges can be held under two major human fundamental rights and their associated ethical principles: the right to health protection and the right to human dignity.
resultsOur research shows how advantageous it could be to reposition the fundamental right to health protection as an input parameter for decisions on the transfusion and plasma supply chain, as this would enable reconciliation of both patient access to these therapies and the protection of donors. This objective means that actions must be prioritized on parameters that do not impact human rights so that the plasma donated is fully exploited and the donors adequately protected.
conclusionDecisions could be made within the remit of human rights, and finally go over the opposition between access to care and donor health protection. As PDMPs have created a kind of international human interdependence, it is our responsibility to place both patients and donors under the umbrella of fundamental human rights, to act not as if a choice has to be made between the two, but in ways that protect them both.
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.