ArticleClinical transplantation2025
Identifying the Views and Needs of Family Physicians on Providing Care to Living Kidney Donors: A Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Clinical transplantation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Developing an Analytic Tool Using a Participatory Research Approach to Examine Gender Differences in the Living Kidney Donation Process.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Optimizing the long-term care and follow-up of living kidney donors (LKDs) has been challenging, and prior LKDs have reported suboptimal healthcare experiences. Long-term care of LKDs is largely undertaken by primary care practitioners such as family physicians (FPs). We conducted a cross-sectional survey of Canadian FPs (n = 151). In our sample, 21.9% of participants reported that ≥1 patient had expressed interest in becoming a LKD, and 39.9% provided care to prior LKDs. While 55.5% knew how to find information on living kidney donation, 75.5% reported that information was not available in their practice. Only a minority had formal training in living kidney donation (<5%), and self-reported knowledge was low (median = 3 [scale 1 = not strong to 10 = very strong]). Knowledge improved significantly with educational activities, resources, experience, and practice needs. Attitudes toward living kidney donation were generally favorable with 71.5% stating that FPs should be involved in post-donation care. Clinical care guidelines (78.8%) were the most desired resource, followed by clear communication and reliable contact at transplant centers. Our findings inform the transplant community of an avenue to optimize LKD care by better-supporting FPs, who provide care to LKDs. This may enhance data collection on LKD outcomes and potentially increase donation rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.