MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Le don d'organes au Canada: I'urgence d'agir

2007· article· fr· W2046518054 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
René Dussault

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Administration · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sommaire: Le taux de dons d'organes au Canada est l'un des plus faibles parmi tous les pays industrialisés. En 2004, il était de 13 donneurs par million alors qu'on peut espérer, en prenant les mesures appropriées, atteindre dans l'avenir près de 30 donneurs par million. Dans un contexte où la rareté des donneurs potentiels, c'est‐à‐dire des personnes en état de décès neurologique, est la cause principale d'insuffisance d'organes, il est essentiel que des mesures soient prises pour réduire le plus possible la perte de ces donneurs. Trois raisons expliquent cette perte: les donneurs éventuels ne sont pas bien identifiés, leur famille n'a pas été approchée ou bien elle a refusé le don. Bien que cause importante de la perte de donneurs, le refus des familles n'explique cette situation qu'en partie. Elle découle tout autant d'un manque de formation des professionnels de la santé et de coordination des activités reliées au don et à la transplantation des organes qui présentent un caractère fortement multidisciplinaire et ont un impact important sur la disponibilité des lits de soins intensifs et des salles d'opération. Pourtant, au Canada comme dans tout autre pays, le meilleur moyen de lutter contre le commerce d'organes est d'organiser un système efficace permettant d'augmenter le taux de donneurs effectifs pour répondre à la demande. Nous devons donc porter nos efforts sur l'organisation plus efficace du système de don et de transplantation des organes et travailler sans relâche à réduire la perte de donneurs potentiels, en agissant de manière concertée sur chacune de ses causes. L'adoption du principe du consentement présumé, qui implique de renverser la présomption de droit civil selon laquelle une personne doit donner un consentement éclairé au don de ses organes, ne peut servir de substitut à ce travail d'organisation et de coordination et doit être vue comme un dernier recours. Abstract: The organ donor rate in Canada is one of the lowest among industrialized countries. In 2004, there were thirteen donors per million population; however, if the appropriate measures are taken, this rate may one day reach close to thirty donors per million. In a context where the scarcity of potential donors ‐ persons in a state of neurological death ‐ is without a doubt the major reason for organ shortage, it is essential that measures be taken to minimize the loss of such donors. The three main causes for the loss of donors are the failure to identify potential donors, the failure to approach the family, or the family's refusal to consent to organ donation. Although it is a major reason for the loss of donors, refusal by families to consent to organ donation represents only a small part of the overall picture. Other equally significant factors are the lack of training for health professionals and the lack of coordination with respect to organ donation and organ transplant activities, both of which are highly multidisciplinary in nature and have a considerable impact on the availability of icu beds and operating rooms. In Canada, however, as in any other country, the best way to fight against the trade in human organs is to organize an efficient system to increase the actual donor rate to meet the demand. Therefore, our efforts must focus first and foremost on improving the organization of the organ donation and organ transplant system. We must also work tirelessly to reduce the loss of potential donors through concerted action on each of these issues. Adopting the principle of presumed consent, which implies the overturning of the presumption of civil rights according to which an individual must give his or her informed consent to donate his or her organs, cannot be a substitute for implementing an organized and coordinated system and must be viewed as a last resort under the circumstances.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public AdministrationSame topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207