<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://cjasn.asnjournals.org">
<title>Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology Ethics</title>
<link>http://cjasn.asnjournals.org</link>
<description>Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology RSS feed -- recent Ethics articles</description>
<prism:eIssn>1555-905X</prism:eIssn>
<prism:publicationName>Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>1555-9041</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/content/short/2/2/300?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/content/short/2/1/107?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
<image rdf:resource="http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/icons/banner/title.gif" />
</channel>

<image rdf:about="http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/icons/banner/title.gif">
<title>Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology</title>
<url>http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/icons/banner/title.gif</url>
<link>http://cjasn.asnjournals.org</link>
</image>

<item rdf:about="http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/content/short/2/2/300?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Routine Recovery of Cadaveric Organs for Transplantation: Consistent, Fair, and Life-Saving]]></title>
<link>http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/content/short/2/2/300?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<P>Many families deny organ recovery from recently deceased relatives. As a result, valuable organs and some of the lives they could save are lost. Several plans designed to rectify this tragic situation have been proposed, including organ sales. We suggest another approach that we believe to be superior and that is rarely discussed: routine recovery of all transplantable cadaveric organs without consent. Here we show that this plan is ethically acceptable, more equitable than our current opting-in approach, consistent with other mandatory social programs, and life-saving. Based on these considerations, we believe that it is time to eliminate entirely the consent requirement for recovery of transplantable cadaveric organs.</P>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Spital, A., Taylor, J. S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-02-27</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.2215/CJN.03260906</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Routine Recovery of Cadaveric Organs for Transplantation: Consistent, Fair, and Life-Saving]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Nephrology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>303</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>300</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Ethics</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/content/short/2/1/107?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Nephrologists' Changing Practices in Reported End-of-Life Decision-Making]]></title>
<link>http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/content/short/2/1/107?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<P>Because the dialysis patient population is increasingly composed of older patients with high symptom burden, shortened life expectancy, and multiple comorbid conditions, nephrologists often engage in end-of-life decision-making with their patients. In the 1990s, reported practices of nephrologists&rsquo; end-of-life decision-making showed much variability. In part as a reaction to that variability, the Renal Physicians Association (RPA) and the American Society of Nephrology (ASN) developed a clinical practice guideline on end-of-life decision-making. To determine whether nephrologists&rsquo; attitudes and reported practices had changed over time, survey responses from 296 nephrologists completing an online survey in 2005 were compared with 318 nephrologists who completed a similar mailed survey in 1990. In 2005, less variability was noted in reported practices to withhold dialysis from a permanently unconscious patient (90% would withhold in 2005 <I>versus</I> 83% who would withhold in 1990, <I>P</I> &lt; 0.001) and to stop dialysis in a severely demented patient (53% in 2005 would stop <I>versus</I> 39% in 1990, <I>P</I> &lt; 0.00001). In 2005, significantly more dialysis units were reported to have written policies on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (86% in 2005 <I>versus</I> 31% in 1990, <I>P</I> &lt; 0.0001) and withdrawal of dialysis (30% in 2005 <I>versus</I> 15% in 1990, <I>P</I> &lt; 0.0002); nephrologists were also more likely to honor a dialysis patient&rsquo;s do-not-resuscitate order (83% in 2005 <I>versus</I> 66%, <I>P</I> &lt; 0.0002) and to consider consulting a Network ethics committee (52% in 2005 <I>versus</I> 39%, <I>P</I> &lt; 0.001). Nephrologists&rsquo; reported practices in end-of-life care have changed significantly over the 15 years separating the two surveys, suggesting that the development of the clinical practice guideline was worthwhile.</P>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Holley, J. L., Davison, S. N., Moss, A. H.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2006-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.2215/CJN.03080906</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Nephrologists' Changing Practices in Reported End-of-Life Decision-Making]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Nephrology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>111</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>107</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Ethics</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>