Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Assessing deemed consent in Wales - the advantages of a broad difference-in-difference design
  1. Andreas Albertsen
  1. Correspondence to Andreas Albertsen, Department of Political Science, School of Business and Social Sciences, Aarhus University, Aarhus C 8000, Denmark; aba{at}ps.au.dk

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

As the debate over an English opt-out policy for organ procurement intensifies, assessing existing experiences becomes even more important. The Welsh introduction of opt-out legislation provides one important point of reference. With the introduction of deemed consent in December 2015, Wales became the first part of the UK to introduce an opt-out system in organ procurement. 

My article ‘Deemed consent: assessing the new opt-out approach to organ procurement in Wales’ conducted an early assessment of this.1 Taking its starting point in important concerns often raised in discussion over opt-out legislation, it identified four key parameters to assess the effects. These are living donor rates, deceased donor rates, donor registrations and family refusals. My article compares these indicators before and after the enactment of the Welsh legislation employing a different-in-different design. In his reply to my article ‘Deemed consent: assessing the new opt-out approach to organ procurement in Wales’, Jordan Alexander Parsons offers two interesting critiques. The first pertains to the choice of indicators. Parsons prefer a narrower focus on the effect on deceased donor rates. The second pertains to the choice of data, Parsons preferring a time series of Wales to my different-in-different design. Parsons  refers mainly to the official Welsh evaluation,2 a report I also cited in supplement to the NHS Activity Report data I employed. …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors Sole author.

  • Funding Carlsbergfondet (CF-140896).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles