ArticleClinical transplantation2026
Canadian Transplant Candidates' and Recipients' Perspectives on Mandatory Vaccination and Access to Transplantation: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Clinical transplantation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven the stronger immunological effects of vaccines pre-transplant, the question of whether pre-transplant COVID-19 vaccination should be mandatory has been raised. The objective of this study was to gather transplant patients' perspectives on ethical issues related to mandatory vaccination and access to transplantation in Canada.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 45 transplant recipients and five transplant candidates from a Québec transplant program. The interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed. Thematic and content analysis was conducted.
resultsMost participants were in favor of pre-transplant vaccine mandates given that vaccination is part of pre-transplant assessment, transplant patients have moral responsibilities and/or vaccine mandates are legitimate especially in a public health emergency. Restrictions on patient autonomy, the ethical duty to ensure access to life-saving transplantation and unequal access to vaccines were concerns raised by participants about vaccination mandates and access to transplantation. Many participants did not support excluding unvaccinated patients from transplant lists. Most, however, agreed with prioritizing vaccinated candidates in organ allocation.
conclusionThis study indicates broad support for the promotion of pre-transplant vaccination. However, preventing access to life-saving organ because an individual is missing specific vaccinations raised concerns among participants. The results of this study could inform vaccination policies in transplantation in future public health emergencies.
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.