ArticleFrontiers in transplantation2026
Variability in clinical triggers for organ donation referrals.
Article in Frontiers in transplantation, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In organ transplantation, regulatory efforts have mainly targeted Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) and transplant centers, while donor hospitals-crucial to the donation process-have remained under-examined. As the first point of contact for potential donors, these hospitals lack standardized criteria for when and how to refer patients to OPOs, creating variability that can delay referral and reduce organ availability. This viewpoint focuses on clinical triggers: the physiological criteria that prompt hospitals to notify OPOs of potential donors. While CMS requires donor hospitals to maintain written agreements with their designated OPOs and to inform the OPO of deaths and "imminent deaths," there is no national standard defining which bedside clinical criteria should prompt timely notifications; most hospitals defer to their local OPO for guidance. We analyzed clinical triggers from 55 of 56 U.S. OPOs and found marked inconsistency. Glasgow Coma Scale thresholds were used by 69.1%, and brainstem reflexes by 54.6%, with wide variation in both. Fewer than half addressed family discussions, and notification windows ranged from immediate to 240 min. These discrepancies reflect a critical bottleneck in the donor identification process. Standardizing clinical triggers and instituting a referral-based performance metric framework may improve metrics, thereby enhancing early donor identification, reducing missed referral opportunities, enhancing organ recovery, and reducing waitlist mortality. As scrutiny of OPOs and transplant centers increases, improving donor hospital practices is essential to optimizing the transplant system.
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.