MATERIALS AND METHODS: We utilize cross sectional data on 350 family members of dialysis patients collected through self-administered survey from June to October 2013. The factors affecting willingness to become deceased and living organ donors among respondents were identified by running logistic regressions.
RESULTS: The findings reveal that ethnicity, education and role in family are significant factors explaining willingness for living donation, while ethnicity, knowledge of organ donation and donor age drive willingness for deceased donation. We also find that the reasons of respondents being unwilling to donate center on the lack of information and family objections for deceased donation, while being medically unfit, scared of surgery and family objections are the reasons for unwillingness to donate living organs.
CONCLUSION: In light of our findings, educational efforts are suggested to decrease the reluctance to become involved in living and deceased donation.
METHOD: Two categories of participants, i.e., medical doctors (n = 11) and final year medical students (Group 1, n = 5; Group 2, n = 10) participated in four separate focus group discussions. Nielsen's 5 dimensions of usability (i.e. learnability, effectiveness, memorability, errors, and satisfaction) and Pentland's narrative network were adapted as the framework to study the usability and the implementation of the checklist in a real clinical setting respectively.
RESULTS: Both categories (medical doctors and medical students) of participants found that the TWED checklist was easy to learn and effective in promoting metacognition. For medical student participants, items "T" and "W" were believed to be the two most useful aspects of the checklist, whereas for the doctor participants, it was item "D". Regarding its implementation, item "T" was applied iteratively, items "W" and "E" were applied when the outcomes did not turn out as expected, and item "D" was applied infrequently. The one checkpoint where all four items were applied was after the initial history taking and physical examination had been performed to generate the initial clinical impression.
CONCLUSION: A metacognitive checklist aimed to check cognitive errors may be a useful tool that can be implemented in the real clinical setting.