ArticleTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation2026
Public perception of xenotransplantation and its implication for policy and regulation: lessons learnt from a qualitative study of the Swedish public.
Article in Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The field of xenotransplantation is advances rapidly. Its cross-species nature creates regulatory challenges different from those in allotransplantation. Public opinion is promoted as an essential element in developing responsible governance for this technology. This study takes a qualitative thematic approach to analyze data collected through a questionnaire (n = 136) to the Swedish public. The aim is, first, to analyze how respondents articulate concerns, hopes, and moral evaluations regarding XT, and second, to reflect on what these responses reveal about the methodological conditions required for meaningful public engagement in the development of regulatory frameworks for emerging biomedical technologies. The findings demonstrate that public views are not directly associated with the technical assessment of risk and benefit but are anchored in shifting sociocultural perceptions regarding human survival, animal welfare, and vulnerability as individuals move between different scenarios. We conclude that developing policy and regulations for XT require continuous engagement with the underlying public opinions. We learned that meaningful public engagement with emerging biomedical technologies involves sustained processes of familiarization, communication, and dialogue between science, society, and policy.
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.