CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Organ Donation and TransplantationRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsEthics and bioethics in healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The use of personalized medicine for patient selection for renal transplantation: Physicians' views on the clinical and ethical implications

Open access
Dion-Labrie, Marianne, Fortin, Marie-Chantal, Hébert, Marie-Josée, Doucet, Hubert·2010·BMC Medical Ethics
DOI 10.1186/1472-6939-11-5PMC PMC2859770
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The overwhelming scarcity of organs within renal transplantation forces researchers and transplantation teams to seek new ways to increase efficacy. One of the possibilities is the use of personalized medicine, an approach based on quantifiable and scientific factors that determine the global immunological risk of rejection for each patient. Although this approach can improve the efficacy of transplantations, it also poses a number of ethical questions. METHODS: The qualitative research involved 22 semi-structured interviews with nephrologists involved in renal transplantation, with the goal of determining the professionals' views about calculating the global immunological risk and the attendant ethical issues. RESULTS: The results demonstrate a general acceptance of this approach amongst the participants in the study. Knowledge of each patient's immunological risk could improve treatment and the post-graft follow-up. On the other hand, the possibility that patients might be excluded from transplantation poses a significant ethical issue. This approach is not seen as something entirely new, given the fact that medicine is increasingly scientific and evidence-based. Although renal transplantation incorporates scientific data, these physicians believe that there should always be a place for clinical judgment and the physician-patient relationship. CONCLUSIONS: The participants see the benefits of including the calculation of the global immunological risk within transplantation. Such data, being more precise and rigorous, could be of help in their clinical work. However, in spite of the use of such scientific data, a place must be retained for the clinical judgment that allows a physician to make decisions based on medical data, professional expertise and knowledge of the patient. To act in the best interests of the patient is key to whether the calculation of the global immunological risk is employed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1472-6939-11-5

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Pires AP: Échantillonnage et recherche qualitative: essai théorique et méthodologique. La recherche qualitative: enjeux épistémologiques et méthodologiques. Edited by: Poupart J, Groulx LH, Deslauriers JP, Laperrière A, Mayer R, Pires AP. 1997, Boucherville: GaëtanMorin, 113-169.
  2. Miles MB, Huberman MA: Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 1994, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2
  3. Bacon F: Francis Bacon's New Atlantis. 2005, Manchester: Manchester University Press
  4. Ricoeur P: Prudential judgment, deontological judgment and reflexive judgment in medical ethics. Bioethics and Biolaw Vol 1 Judgment of life. Edited by: Kemp P, Rendtorff J, Johansen NM. 2000, Copenhagen: Rhodos International Science and Art Publishers & Centre for Ethics and Law
  5. Veatch RM: Cross Cultural Perspectives in Medical Ethics. 2000, Boston: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2
  6. Evans JH: Playing God? Human genetic engineering and the rationalization of public bioethical debate. 2002, Chicago: University Of Chicago Press
  7. Ricoeur P: Oneself as Another. 1992, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
  8. Fox RC, Swazey JP: The Courage to Fail. A Social View of Organ Transplants and Dialysis. Revised ed. published by University of Chicago Press, 1978. 2002, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Dion-Labrie, M., Fortin, M.-C., Hébert, M.-J., & Doucet, H.
Affiliations
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • Hôpital Notre-Dame (CA)
Corresponding author
Dion-Labrie, Marianne
ORCID
Venue
BMC Medical Ethics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2010-04-09
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
5-5
ISSN
1472-6939 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/1472-6939-11-5
PMC
PMC2859770
OpenAlex
W2085255279
Cited by
21
References
31
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • BMC Medical Ethics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Organ Donation and Transplantation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Transplantation › Renal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
personalized medicine, kidney transplantation, patient selection, immunological risk, graft rejection, physician attitudes, clinical judgment, physician-patient relationship, organ shortage, clinical ethics
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Decision Making, Ethics, Medical, Female, Humans, Judgment, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Physicians, Predictive Value of Tests, Quebec, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Kidney Transplantation, Risk Assessment, Patient Selection, Ethics, Clinical, Interdisciplinary Communication, Uncertainty, Qualitative Research, Precision Medicine

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