An international comparison of deceased and living organ donation/transplant rates in opt-in and opt-out systems: a panel study

Table 2 Countries excluded from the analyses

Reason	Countries excluded for this reason
Inactive deceased or living donor program^a	Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Egypt, El Salvador, Georgia, India, Libya, Luxembourg, Macedonia
Less than three years of living or deceased data^b	Bahrain, Bolivia, Brunei, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Slovenia, Trinidad and Tobago
Population less than two million^c	Cyprus, Estonia, Iceland, Malta, Qatar
Inconsistent consent legislation^d	Dominican Republic, Switzerland, Turkey
Changed legislation in 13 year period^e	Chile, Uruguay
Legal paid system^d	Iran
Large number of transplants occurring abroad^d	Saudi Arabia
Reports of high levels of organ trafficking^f	Moldova, Ukraine
Mixed civil and common laws^g	Norway, Philippines, South Africa, South Korea

^aData from the IRODaT database indicated that the country had not performed the transplant in the 13 year period under investigation. ^bBased on data from the IRODaT database. ^cBased on population statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau. This was based on the population for 2000 because this was the first year under investigation. ^dBased on previous research [11]. ^eBased on previous research [11],[17]. ^fThis was based on news reports [19],[20]. ^gBased on data from the World Factbook. Although parts of the USA (Louisiana) and Canada (Quebec) use civil law, these were regarded as common law countries because this is the dominant legal system. Similarly, although Spain has regional variations in the legal system it predominantly uses civil law and was, therefore, categorized as such. Although Japan’s legal system is influenced by Anglo-American law, it is based on the German model of civil law and was, therefore, regarded as a civil law country.

ISSN: 1741-7015