Table 2.
Countries excluded from the analyses
Reason | Countries excluded for this reason |
---|---|
Inactive deceased or living donor programa | Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Egypt, El Salvador, Georgia, India, Libya, Luxembourg, Macedonia |
Less than three years of living or deceased datab | Bahrain, Bolivia, Brunei, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Slovenia, Trinidad and Tobago |
Population less than two millionc | Cyprus, Estonia, Iceland, Malta, Qatar |
Inconsistent consent legislationd | Dominican Republic, Switzerland, Turkey |
Changed legislation in 13 year periode | Chile, Uruguay |
Legal paid systemd | Iran |
Large number of transplants occurring abroadd | Saudi Arabia |
Reports of high levels of organ traffickingf | Moldova, Ukraine |
Mixed civil and common lawsg | 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.