MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7111035395 · doi:10.1016/j.nre.2023.100748

Outcomes from organ donation following medical assistance in dying:A sset.' scoping review

2023· article· en· W7111035395 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Publications (Maastricht University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood ServicesSt. Lawrence CollegeUniversity of OttawaBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrgan donationDonationTransplantationOrgan transplantationMedical literatureUnited Network for Organ Sharing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM To Compare and sumniaize the cLnrie s Latrnaionalliteiature o the transpla trcipient ocomes oforgan gon Medical Assistane in Dyig (MAi) dnors, asvefl as e actual and)otentiailmpact of oiran ionation followint MAID n the donation and transplantation system.Background: The provision of organ donation following MAiD can impact the donation and transplantation system, as well as potential recipients oforgans froiniie MAD donor. therefore a compiehensive undeistanding of the potential and actUal impactof organ donation after MAD on the donation and transplantation systems is needed.Design:Scoping review using the JBI fianlewoik.Methods. We searched for published (MEDLINE, Enibase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Academic Search Complete, and unpublished literature (organ donation organization weasites worldwide). Included teferences discussed the actual and potential inipact of organ donation following MAiD on the donation and transplantation systen All references were screened, extracted and analysed by Two independent reviewers.Resuits: We included 78 references in this review andou finding weresuninarized across three categories: (1) Impact in the donor pool: (2) statistics on organ donation following MAiD. and (3) potential and actual impact of MAD on the donation and transplant system.Conclusions:The potential impact of the MAiD donor on the transplant waiting list is relatively small as this process is still rare, however, due to the culrrent organ shortageworldwide the contribution of this procedure should not be disregarded. Additionally, despite being limited, the existing research provided scanty evidence that organs retrieved fion MAID donos ae associated with satisfactory giaft function and snuvival rates and that outcones fLon nansplant recipients are comparable to those of organs fros donation following brain death and msay hebetter than those of organs fion other types of donation after circulatory deteinined death. Still, fuithe studies are required for comprehensive and reliable evidence.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0190.022
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Publications (Maastricht University)Same topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207