ライフサイエンスコーパス: donation

1 justify policy change towards imminent death donation.

2 atients having baseline contraindication for donation.

3 PrEP use within the same time frame as blood donation.

4 67%) and mean age was 38.9 +/- 11.2 years at donation.

5 by amplifying the benefit derived from their donation.

6 eased donors and the safety of living kidney donation.

7 ance that all patients have timely access to donation.

8 the location, time, and quantity of analyte donation.

9 hospitals were admitted to the ICU for organ donation.

10 is dead but are also asked to consider organ donation.

11 inform and prepare donors for outcomes after donation.

12 ial media can be influential in living organ donation.

13 tation should be considered for living-liver donation.

14 highlighting the success and impact of organ donation.

15 nd inexpensive adjunct therapy in multiorgan donation.

16 ere more fearful of being alive during organ donation.

17 7% of the participants were aware of corneal donation.

18 e Ru(V)-oxo moiety via a strong pai-electron donation.

19 donors and their healthcare providers about donation.

20 rrest (OHCA) patients were screened for uDCD donation.

21 or normothermia (36.5-37.5 degrees C) before donation.

22 in this rodent model of marginal DCD cardiac donation.

23 ained normotensive during the 6 hours before donation.

24 ir payment for participation as a charitable donation.

25 ple seek to benefit from their very generous donation.

26 are appropriate candidates for partial liver donation.

27 represent a formal contraindication for live donation.

28 significant stabilization of 5 via Ru -> Zn donation.

29 d as a potential consequence of nonheart DCD donation.

30 e data to identify patients capable of large donations.

31 rgan donor or in products derived from these donations.

32 athy than men in messages accompanying their donations.

33 dependent on the rate of assumed infectious donations.

34 ors associated with requesting living kidney donations.

35 sults indicating that 11% of these anonymous donations (2.3% of all donations) are not attributable t

36 e to nonprofits, none directly tests whether donations actually provide public goods.

37 y-nine (98%) patients transitioned to actual donation after BD, with 1.2 organs transplanted per dono

38 om donation after circulatory death (DCD) or donation after brain death (DBD) donors.

39 R), we compared outcomes after DCD in FHF to donation after brain death (DBD) in FHF and DCD in non-F

40 pare outcomes following cDCD LT with NRP and donation after brain death (DBD) LT.

41 (2010-2018), outcomes of 30 DCD SLK and 131 donation after brain death (DBD) SLK from Mayo Clinic Ar

42 Circulatory Death (DCD) is an alternative to Donation after Brain death (DBD), and is a growing strat

43 Unlike conventional donation after brain death, DCD organs undergo a period

44 vs 39.5 years, P < 0.0001), more frequently donation after cardiac death (DCD) (18% vs 7%, P < 0.001

45 Outcomes of both donation after cardiac death (DCD) liver and kidney tran

46 ly function immediately, whereas organs from donation after cardiac death (DCD) or acute kidney injur

47 how hepatectomy time (HT), in the context of donation after cardiac death (DCD) procurement, impacts

48 Kidneys from older (age >=50 years) donation after cardiac death (DCD50) donors are less lik

49 nors (HBD), and from donors with 30 minutes (donation after cardiac death [DCD]30'), 70 minutes (DCD7

50 plant, older recipient age, older donor age, donation after cardiac death, and longer cold ischemia.

51 ble and nonviable organs, local cost levels, donation after cardiac death, year, and Standardized Don

52 kg/m, P = 0.01), and transplantation with a donation after circulatory death (aIRR 5.38, P = 0.001)

53 Liver transplantation (LT) from controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) was initiated in

54 Limited data exist regarding the impact of donation after circulatory death (DCD) allografts on out

55 Death in donation after circulatory death (DCD) can be defined by

56 While clinical donation after circulatory death (DCD) cardiac transplan

57 or livers that are both steatotic and from a donation after circulatory death (DCD) donor, there is a

58 Transplantation of hearts retrieved from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors is an evol

59 cern in liver transplantation of grafts from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors remains th

60 med with livers from heart-beating donors or donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors subjected

61 utilization of liver and kidney grafts from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors who died f

62 controversial whether renal allografts from donation after circulatory death (DCD) have a higher ris

63 Donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart transplanta

64 Donation after Circulatory Death (DCD) is an alternative

65 lly defined delayed graft function (fDGF) in donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidney transplant

66 Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver grafts are

67 Increasing organ availability with donation after circulatory death (DCD) may be a promisin

68 uid was collected from 48 kidney grafts from donation after circulatory death (DCD) or donation after

69 idney transplant (SLKT) are opting to accept donation after circulatory death (DCD) organs as a means

70 to undergo beating-heart donation (n = 9) or donation after circulatory death (n = 8) induced by hypo

71 pool could be the introduction of unexpected donation after circulatory death (uDCD) donors.

72 Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD) refers to donati

73 h the use of organs after circulatory death (donation after circulatory death [DCD]).

74 Five pairs of human kidney allografts from donation after circulatory death donors were studied.

75 nt and conditioning of abdominal organs from donation after circulatory death donors with reported im

76 aNRP with standard procurement technique in donation after circulatory death donors would be needed

77 r preservation strategies for the storage of donation after circulatory death grafts are essential to

78 l normothermic regional perfusion (aNRP) for donation after circulatory death is an emerging organ pr

79 s the incidence of delayed graft function in donation after circulatory death kidney transplantation.

80 E treatment protected recipients of extended donation after circulatory death kidneys from immune act

81 ood perfusion in the preservation of porcine donation after circulatory death kidneys.

82 ments, the immune response was assessed in a donation after circulatory death model of kidney transpl

83 nt a novel, superior preservation option for donation after circulatory death renal grafts compared w

84 Donation after circulatory death utilization has risen i

85 Other triggers included organ donation after circulatory death, initiation of extracor

86 d from bypass (beating-heart donation versus donation after circulatory death; P = 0.580).

87 family members who were approached for organ donation after the death of their relative in the ICU (b

88 family members who were approached for organ donation after the death of their relative in the ICU (b

89 mprised a sample of 265 OLTs using livers of donations after brain death (DBDs).

90 a statistically significant increase in lung donations after implementing rotational positioning of d

91 lored, ethically balanced education on organ donation among Muslim Americans.

92 inpatient deaths from causes consistent with donation among patients <75 years of age.

93 inpatient deaths from causes consistent with donation among patients <75 years of age.

94 Donation among unrelated black individuals should be pro

95 nce of social grooming and regurgitated food donations among previously unfamiliar captive vampire ba

96 level of awareness (32.7%) of transplant and donation amongst the study population but a good level o

97 e both significantly affected by the average donation amounts visible at the time of their decisions,

98 the ED, without contraindications for organ donation, an ICU admission was considered.

99 Twenty-seven families consented to donation and 20 successful organ donations were performe

100 ND-LLDs demonstrated acceptable HR-QOL after donation and are appropriate candidates for partial live

101 2015 (n = 1012) were surveyed 6 months after donation and asked about occupation, time to return to w

102 Beliefs about the negative consequences of donation and concerns over the medical care given to pot

103 omise as effective tools to promote deceased donation and expand living donor transplantation.

104 The weekly organ donation and liver transplant numbers over a 3-month per

105 There was a substantial reduction in organ donation and liver transplantation activity across the 3

106 as led to a significant contraction in organ donation and liver transplantation in all 3 countries.

107 Older age at donation and nondirected (vs directed) donation were ass

108 ubstantially contributes to increasing organ donation and offers more patients the chance of donating

109 nderstanding of the consent system for organ donation and some important nuances about the role of fa

110 atients develop adequate antibody titers for donation and the relationship between avidity and neutra

111 onation, as has been the initial response of donation and transplant societies.

112 is anecdotal evidence of reduction in organ donation and transplantation activity across the world.

113 To identify changes to organ donation and transplantation during this time, an anonym

114 Over the last decade, organ donation and transplantation rates have increased in Aus

115 institutions need to plan for reductions in donations and loss of crucial staff because of sickness

116 cipants met inclusion criteria and completed donations and psychological evaluations of perceived str

117 iews of brain death continue to hamper organ donation, and are seemingly resistant to both time and l

118 King's College London, NHS Hackney, Lee Him donation, and Felicity Wilde Charitable Trust.

119 a graft's "intrinsic quality" at the time of donation, and further support the use of intraoperative

120 discuss their fears and concerns about organ donation, and given an immediate opportunity to register

121 or neutral about their overall health since donation, and none expressed postdonation regrets.

122 to specialized cardiac arrest centers, organ donation, and performance measurement across the continu

123 ansfusion of blood and blood products, organ donation, and perinatally.

124 y genomic research is necessary and how data donation, and subsequent sharing, is integral to this.

125 and NDDs from the Alliance for Paired Kidney Donation, and the actual DDs from the Scientific Registr

126 04), perceived kidney disease risk following donation (aOR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.03, 2.73, P = .03), inter

127 onors in the United States who were obese at donation are at increased risk of end-stage renal diseas

128 ons combined with the An-L delta or phi back-donations are crucial in explaining this non-classical t

129 1% of these anonymous donations (2.3% of all donations) are not attributable to any egoistic goal.

130 to accept the death and say goodbye; and 3) donation as a comfort during bereavement.

131 ighlight the importance of postmortem tissue donations as an invaluable resource to accelerate resear

132 ld continue to remain a contraindication for donation, as has been the initial response of donation a

133 United States to undergo living donor kidney donation at US transplant centers.

134 edical and religious knowledge affects organ donation attitudes among Muslims.

135 than in HCCH, and the C-C pai bonds undergo donation bonding with the U centers.

136 nitiate chains of living donor kidney paired donation, but the potential gains of this practice need

137 The pai-back-donation by the electron-rich alkyl thiolate presumably

138 Last, organ donation can be experienced as a form of comfort during

139 ed to develop policies so that living kidney donation can be financially neutral.

140 od, inter-donation intervals for whole blood donation can be safely reduced to meet blood shortages.

141 Organ donation candidates also exhibited an increase in severe

142 e of severe obesity within the pool of organ donation candidates.

143 In this study, source plasma from donation centers in various locations of the Southwester

144 monstrate that the direct L-An sigma and pai donations combined with the An-L delta or phi back-donat

145 isk of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) after donation compared with healthy nondonors for multiple po

146 al interaction, whereas the Fe -> P pai-back-donation corresponds to ~15% of the orbital interaction.

147 osophical dilemma, a medical dilemma, a real donation decision between a more vs. less effective char

148 lia's "opt-in" system, people register their donation decision on the Australian Organ Donor Register

149 e (:BR) complexes via metal d(pai) ->BR back-donation, despite the electron deficiency of boron.

150 spite of caregivers' efforts to focus organ donation discussions and decision on the patient, family

151 Organ donation during the current climate has seen significant

152 sques randomized to an early arm where organ donation education preceded a control educational worksh

153 le, low-cost, African American-centric organ donation educational video.

154 individuals in their decisions around tissue donation following MAiD, while highlighting how healthca

155 In this Viewpoint, we argue that tissue donation following medical assistance in death (MAiD) wi

156 cs and seroreactivity after testing of blood donations for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavi

157 and maximize the favorable hyperconjugative donation from each nitrogen atom into neighboring electr

158 This work was supported by a gift donation from Jack Levin to the Benign Hematology progra

159 ion after circulatory death (uDCD) refers to donation from persons who die following an unexpected an

160 ce 2010, 60 postmortem pediatric brain tumor donations from 26 institutions were coordinated and coll

161 screening assays are unable to detect HIV in donations from infected donors.

162 analytical equilibrium calculations for the donation game and evolutionary simulations for several o

163 Prosocial behaviours are encountered in the donation game, the prisoner's dilemma, relaxed social di

164 Using a simple donation game, which is a real-world version of the Dict

165 elf-reported symptoms potentially related to donation, haemoglobin and ferritin concentrations, and d

166 Pre-donation history of mood disorder (adjusted ratio of mea

167 quantify the association between early post-donation hypertension and recipient graft failure using

168 rogram of Intensive Care to facilitate Organ Donation (ICOD) in 2 Spanish centers based on a common p

169 Imminent death donation (IDD) is described as living organ donation pri

170 religious (Islamic Knowledge of Living Organ Donation, IK-LOD) living kidney donation knowledge.

171 Based on evaluation of donation impact, consideration should be given to postdo

172 While resource donation improves axon function and visual acuity in the

173 ncontrolled DCD donors (uDCDs) have expanded donation in Europe since the 1980s, but are seldom used

174 lessons that can be drawn from living donor donation in other countries.

175 espite adjustment for donor characteristics, donation in the more recent era remained a significant p

176 e was early evidence of recovery of deceased donation in the United States and United Kingdom and res

177 The first sustained increase in live kidney donation in the United States in 15 years was observed f

178 d experience with kidney transplantation and donation in transgender patients.

179 imately 8% of their countries' living kidney donations in 2015.

180 Donations in 4 major blood collection organizations were

181 ents with contraindications to both deceased donation (including infection, malignancy, cardiopulmona

182 Trends in Region 9 DCD donation increased from 4 unused hearts in 2011, to 13 i

183 gens has been effective in identifying blood donations infected with the classic transfusion-transmit

184 ing the significance of these delta/phi back-donation interactions, and their importance for complexe

185 emoglobin (difference per week shorter inter-donation interval -0.84 g/L [95% CI -0.99 to -0.70] in m

186 percentage difference per week shorter inter-donation interval -6.5% [95% CI -7.6 to -5.5] in men and

187 emoglobin (odds ratio per week shorter inter-donation interval 1.19 [95% CI 1.15-1.22] in men and 1.1

188 the extension study, each week shorter inter-donation interval increased blood collection by a mean o

189 cipation on their originally allocated inter-donation intervals (men: 12, 10, and 8 weeks; women: 16,

190 ial showed that, over a 2-year period, inter-donation intervals for whole blood donation can be safel

191 ger-term risks and benefits of varying inter-donation intervals, and to compare routine versus more i

192 Every ICU admission to incorporate organ donation into end-of-life care was systematically evalua

193 ere admitted to the ICU to incorporate organ donation into end-of-life care.

194 f men who have sex with men (MSM) from blood donation is highly debated.

195 Evidence about outcomes after living kidney donation is needed both to inform donor acceptance crite

196 ison with a healthy cohort suggest that live donation is not associated with excess mortality, end-st

197 Literature on living nondirected liver donation is sparse.

198 Living Organ Donation, IK-LOD) living kidney donation knowledge.

199 d growth of large, multicenter kidney-paired donation (KPD) clearinghouses have broadened the transpl

200 Cooperative kidney paired donation (KPD) networks account for an increasing propor

201 ar experience of Mayo Clinic's kidney paired donation (KPD).We aimed to determine the benefits for th

202 Long-term safety of living kidney donation (LKD), especially for young donors, has become

203 ata to study prosocial behavior by analyzing donations made on the GoFundMe platform.

204 g employee education, office decoration with donation materials, and customer experience improvements

205 hydrogen-atom abstraction and hydrogen-atom donation mediated by two distinct catalysts.

206 cluded as risk-adjusted variables in the CMS donation metric.

207 ntext, the criteria that govern living donor donations must live up to very demanding standards as we

208 pigs were assigned to undergo beating-heart donation (n = 9) or donation after circulatory death (n

209 In 2016, universal individual donation nucleic acid testing (ID-NAT) of donated blood

210 life in expectation by triggering a targeted donation of 350 euros or received an amount of 100 euros

211 ified kidney donation (UKD) describes living donation of a kidney to a stranger.

212 Frequent donation of convalescent plasma did not significantly de

213 region; then, the P-O bond formation via the donation of electron density of the nonbonding region of

214 he C-C bond formation, which takes place via donation of electron density of the ylide carbon to the

215 the activation of N(2) via an enhanced back donation of electrons to the N(2) LUMO.

216 are essential micronutrients involved in the donation of methyl groups in cellular metabolism.

217 electron density of metal NPs through sigma-donation of NHCs substantially improve the selectivity f

218 acute bacterial endocarditis, and posthumous donation of sperm.

219 fluence and direct chemical reaction through donation of strong hydrogen bonds while being weak accep

220 Pharmaceutical donations of preventive chemotherapy for neglected tropi

221 tion, moment to approach families to discuss donation opportunities, criteria for the determination o

222 t associated with the rate of deceased organ donation or median waiting time for transplant in indivi

223 s of the deceased, which can mean preventing donation, or permitting donation when the deceased refus

224 SRD is rare, an earlier and more common post-donation outcome could serve as a surrogate to individua

225 ), increasing awareness about deceased organ donation (P < 0.01), and advertising for transplant cent

226 donor nephrectomy has increased live kidney donation, paving the way for further innovation to expan

227 , and reinforce that the WHO target of 10-20 donations per 1000 population is an underestimate for ma

228 and treatments that also remove IgG (plasma donation, plasma exchange, immunoadsorption); (c) diseas

229 itals, and the role that beliefs about organ donation play in registration behavior.

230 cations for the adoption of an opt-out organ donation policy.

231 itiating kidneys (DD-CIK) in a kidney paired donation pool (KPDP), and estimate potential increases i

232 donation (IDD) is described as living organ donation prior to a planned withdrawal of life-sustainin

233 ely concerned with losing trust in the organ donation process.

234 ants would be less likely to trust the organ donation process.

235 ors may incur out-of-pocket costs during the donation process.

236 The National Kidney Registry (NKR) Advanced Donation Program enables living donors the opportunity t

237 To date, no living donation program has simultaneously addressed the needs

238 s and 16 pairs enrolled in the kidney paired donation program, it was possible to transplant 8 of 16

239 We argue that the expansion of medicine donation programmes and the development of new medicines

240 Living kidney donation provides the best outcomes (survival, cost, and

241 An OPO's organ donation rate (deceased donors/potential donors) and org

242 OPOs changed their pass/fail status for the donation rate and 5 for the proposed organ transplant ra

243 7, 31 (53%) OPOs failed to meet the proposed donation rate standard, 36 (62%) failed to meet the prop

244 ly significant difference in expected kidney donation rate.

245 of health factors negatively associated with donation rate.

246 n in the United States would improve overall donation rates and provide a pathway to utilize these id

247 on-level characteristics and expected kidney donation rates by Gulf States location.

248 We estimated OPO-level donation rates using CDC data, and used Agency for Healt

249 We estimated OPO-level donation rates using CDC data, and used AHRQ/HCUP data f

250 Although Gulf State DSAs have lower expected donation rates, these differences appear to be driven by

251 Inpatient Databases to calculate "adjusted" donation rates.

252 ent Databases (SIDs) to calculate 'adjusted' donation rates.

253 from certain causes that could lead to organ donation, rather than the current unverifiable eligible

254 f'effect is stronger in the context of organ donation registration behaviour.

255 ovel program thus yielded significant kidney donation-related knowledge gains among Muslim Americans

256 ronic postsurgical pain (CPSP), that is, any donation-related pain on POD56.

257 The outcomes of living kidney donation reported in contemporary trials and observation

258 with obesity (body mass index, >=30 kg/m) at donation reported to the Scientific Registry of Transpla

259 The P -> Fe donation represents ~70% of the orbital interaction, whe

260 r to be related to network size or to living donation requests, but rather to the network members the

261 ng sex and gender in allotransplantation and donation research during study design and analysis.

262 An educational video promoting organ donation resulted in increased organ donor registration

263 More frequent donation resulted in more deferrals for low haemoglobin

264 A group of 164 healthy candidates for kidney donation served as controls.

265 to the lung allocation policy eliminated the donation service area (DSA) as the first geographic tier

266 In November 2017, the donation service area (DSA) was removed as the primary u

267 n population health characteristics within a donation service area (DSA).

268 y nonprocurements and kidney discards at the donation service area level.

269 ntation across centers nationally and within donation service areas (DSAs), we conducted a registry s

270 ed donor liver transplantation (DDLT) across donation service areas (DSAs).

271 rdam Renal Replacement Knowledge Test living donation subscale, R3KT) and religious (Islamic Knowledg

272 potentially increase registrations in opt-in donation systems.

273 ever, graft failure was associated with post-donation systolic blood pressure (per 10 mmHg, aHR 1.05,

274 e also examined the association between post-donation systolic blood pressure and graft failure.

275 and arbitrary decision-making during a $1000-donation task to non-profit organizations.

276 After completing a charitable donation task, participants performed a "mentalizer" tas

277 ontributes to the low rate of deceased organ donation that has been observed amongst Asians.

278 ctly communicate his or her wishes regarding donation, the family is often the only source of informa

279 ipid A2 receptor, the risk of living-related donation, the link between de novo MN and rejection, and

280 lue of antiPLA2R, the risk of living-related donation, the link between de novo MN and rejection, and

281 periods with lower rates of Zika-infectious donations, the cost-effectiveness of screening will be e

282 roups reported strong positive beliefs about donation, these did not predict registration.

283 explore whether moral nudges promote charity donations to humanitarian organisations in a large (N =

284 Unspecified kidney donation (UKD) describes living donation of a kidney to

285 The principal themes were living donation, use of marginal liver donors, machine preserva

286 ccessfully weaned from bypass (beating-heart donation versus donation after circulatory death; P = 0.

287 eople who have personally consented to organ donation via first person authorization (FPA) registrati

288 cities, self-reported PrEP use proximate to donation was assessed.

289 The increase in donation was driven predominantly by unrelated and paire

290 orporating desensitization and kidney paired donation, was created at our institution.

291 a dataset of more than $44 million in online donations, we find that 21% were made while opting to be

292 ge at donation and nondirected (vs directed) donation were associated with significantly decreased fi

293 HIV-positive donations were classified as recently acquired or long-t

294 onsented to donation and 20 successful organ donations were performed.

295 ) completed a measure of beliefs about organ donation, were encouraged to discuss their fears and con

296 can mean preventing donation, or permitting donation when the deceased refused it.

297 default is not to remove organs, and oppose donation where there is no evidence of preference but th

298 confirmed infertility or the need for semen donation who were eligible for standard bolus intra-uter

299 sent an ethical analysis of travel for organ donation with particular attention to lessons that can b

300 tions of the effect of physicians discussing donations with their patients; and opinions regarding gi