The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impact of presumed consent for organ donation on donation rates: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the impact of a system of presumed consent for organ donation on donation rates and to review data on attitudes towards presumed consent. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Studies retrieved by online searches to January 2008 of Medline, Medline In-Process, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, HMIC, PAIS International, and OpenSIGLE. Studies reviewed Five studies comparing donation rates before and after the introduction of legislation for presumed consent (before and after studies); eight studies comparing donation rates in countries with and without presumed consent systems (between country comparisons); 13 surveys of public and professional attitudes to presumed consent. RESULTS: The five before and after studies represented three countries: all reported an increase in donation rates after the introduction of presumed consent, but there was little investigation of any other changes taking place concurrently with the change in legislation. In the four best quality between country comparisons, presumed consent law or practice was associated with increased organ donation-increases of 25-30%, 21-26%, 2.7 more donors per million population, and 6.14 more donors per million population in the four studies. Other factors found to be important in at least one study were mortality from road traffic accidents and cerebrovascular causes, transplant capacity, gross domestic product per capita, health expenditure per capita, religion (Catholicism), education, public access to information, and a common law legal system. Eight surveys of attitudes to presumed consent were of the UK public. These surveys varied in the level of support for presumed consent, with surveys conducted before 2000 reporting the lowest levels of support (28-57%). The most recent survey, in 2007, reported that 64% of respondents supported a change to presumed consent. CONCLUSION: Presumed consent alone is unlikely to explain the variation in organ donation rates between countries. Legislation, availability of donors, organisation and infrastructure of the transplantation service, wealth and investment in health care, and public attitudes to and awareness of organ donation may all play a part, but their relative importance is unclear. Recent UK surveys show support for presumed consent, though with variation in results that may reflect differences in survey methods.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Quantile regression for longitudinal data
Koenker, R. (2004) · Journal of Multivariate Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.jmva.2004.05.006 · Cited by 2,177
What works?Evidence-based policy and practice in public services
Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M., & Smith, P. C. (2000) · Policy Press eBooks · doi:10.1332/policypress/9781861341914.001.0001 · Cited by 911
A systematic review of presumed consent systems for deceased organ donation
Rithalia, A. D., McDaid, C., Suekarran, S., Norman, G., Myers, L., & Sowden, A. J. (2009) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta13260 · Cited by 112
Self-citationThe Pocket Guide to Critical Appraisal: A Handbook for Health Care Professionals
Crombie, I. K. (1996) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 89
The Pocket Guide to Critical Appraisal: A Handbook for Health Care Professionals
Harvey, B. J. (1997) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 74
Giving urban policy its ‘medical’: assessing the place of health in area-based regeneration
Atkinson, R., Thomson, H., Kearns, A., & Petticrew, M. P. (2005) · Policy & Politics · doi:10.1332/030557306775212179 · Cited by 23
Cited by
Organ donation in the US and Europe: The supply vs demand imbalance
Lewis, A., Koukoura, A., Tsianos, G.-I., Gargavanis, A. A., Nielsen, A. A., & Vassiliadis, E. (2021) · Transplantation Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.trre.2020.100585 · Cited by 359
The ethics of nudging: An overview
Schmidt, A. T., & Engelen, B. (2020) · Philosophy Compass · doi:10.1111/phc3.12658 · Cited by 328
Deller, R. C., Vatish, M., Mitchell, D. A., & Gibson, M. I. (2014) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms4244 · Cited by 311
Modifiable factors influencing relatives' decision to offer organ donation: systematic review
Simpkin, A. L., Robertson, L. C., Barber, V. S., & Young, J. D. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b991 · Cited by 310
Comparison of organ donation and transplantation rates between opt-out and opt-in systems
Arshad, A., Anderson, B., & Sharif, A. (2019) · Kidney International · doi:10.1016/j.kint.2019.01.036 · Cited by 285
Metadata
- Authors
- Rithalia, A., McDaid, C., Suekarran, S., Myers, L., & Sowden, A.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2009-01-14
- Volume
- 338
- Issue
- jan14 2
- Pages
- a3162-a3162
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2091745411
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 4.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of presumed consent for organ donation on donation rates: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.a3162
- The paper
- Rithalia, A., McDaid, C., Suekarran, S., Myers, L., & Sowden, A. (2009). Impact of presumed consent for organ donation on donation rates: a systematic review. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a3162
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.