Next Article in Journal
A Study on the Effect of Nano Alumina Particles on Fracture Behavior of PMMA
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of Calcium Fluoroaluminosilicate Based Glass Ionomer Luting Cements Processed Both by Conventional and Microwave Assisted Methods
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Technologies
Volume 3
Issue 2
10.3390/technologies3020074
technologies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Analysis of the Science and Technology Narrative within Organ Donation and Transplantation Coverage in Canadian Newspapers

by
Jennifer Cheung
1 and
Gregor Wolbring
2,*
1
Bachelor of Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N4N1, Canada
2
Department of Community Health Sciences, Specialization in Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N4N1, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Technologies 2015, 3(2), 74-93; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies3020074
Submission received: 8 September 2014 / Revised: 2 March 2015 / Accepted: 2 April 2015 / Published: 9 April 2015
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Organ failure is one cause of death. Advancements in scientific research and technological development made organ transplantation possible and continue to find better ways to substitute failed organs with other organs of biological origin or artificial organs. Media, including newspapers, are one source of information for the public. The purpose of this study was to examine to what extent and how science and technology research and development are covered in the organ transplantation and organ donation (ODOT) coverage of n = 300 Canadian newspapers, including the two Canadian newspapers with national reach (The Globe and Mail, National Post). The study generated qualitative and quantitative data addressing the following issues: (1) which scientific and technological developments are mentioned in the ODOT coverage; and (2) what issues are mentioned in the coverage of scientific and technological advancements linked to ODOT. We found little to no coverage of many technological and scientific advancements evident in academic and grey literature covering ODOT, and we found little engagement with social and ethical issues already raised about these advancements in the literature. The only area we found to be covered to a broader extent was xenotransplantation, although the coverage stopped after 2002. We argue that the newspaper coverage of ODOT under reports scientific and technological advancements related to ODOT and the issues these advancements might raise.

1. Introduction

Organ failure is one cause of death. Advancements in scientific research and technological development (SRTD) made organ transplantation possible [1,2,3,4,5,6], and SRTD efforts are constantly under way to better the outcome of organ transplantations. The need for replacing failed human organs exceeds available organs from human donors; for example, the various Eurotransplant waiting lists contain over 15,000 people of whom 1451 died in 2011 [7]. The situation is not any better in Canada [8], the USA [9] or China [10]. Therefore, SRTD efforts are also focusing on finding ways to substitute failed organs that do not involve human organs, such as stem cell transplants [11], using organs of non-human origin [12,13], growing organs from human stem cells [14], organ printing [15,16,17,18] or the use of artificial organs [19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26] (see also the literature around ears, eyes, knees, neural prostheses, joints, muscles, kidney, liver, cartilage, lungs, discs, pancreas, dental pulp, skin, hippocampus, legs and hands), and for functions, such as speech, which do not mention transplantation [27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49].
Many issues are discussed around organ donation and organ transplantation (ODOT) linked to the different possible sources of organs [50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62]. Academic studies cover various aspects of media and ODOT, including: the impact of social media, such as Facebook, on organ donor registration [63], the effect of entertainment-education programs in Korea on organ donor registration [64], the effectiveness of using reciprocity to motivate organ donations [65], the role of the media in promoting organ donation to Hispanics [66,67], the impact of social representation of organ donation on organ donation campaigns [68], the impact of media on the promotion of the Michigan organ donor registry [69], the use of mass media campaigns to change health behavior [70], a meta-analytic review of communication campaigns to promote organ donation [71] and the results of the ISHLT/FACT poll that gave evidence on how to improve organ donation [72]. No study has looked at ODOT media coverage through science and technology narratives.
The purpose of this study was to examine to what extent and how SRTD is covered in the ODOT coverage of n = 300 Canadian newspapers, including two Canadian newspapers with national reach (The Globe and Mail, National Post). The study generated qualitative and quantitative data addressing the following issues: (1) which scientific and technological developments are mentioned in the ODOT coverage; and (2) what issues are mentioned in the coverage of scientific and technological advancements linked to ODOT.

2. Methods

2.1. Analytical Framework

We used a framing analysis [73] to investigate the coverage of SRDT within ODOT covering newspaper articles. Structural [74], content [75] and issue-specific framing [76,77] are three ways of framing. We were interested in how SRTDs linked to ODOT are covered within the content of ODOT coverage. Our content analysis focuses on how the communicator (the newspaper) frames SRTDs as they relate to ODOT. Persuasion is one media effect and encompasses the message, who is used as a source and the “persuadability of media consumers” [78]. The question is what the reader will be persuaded of after reading the SRTD coverage within ODOT covering newspaper articles?

2.2. Data Source and Data Analysis

2.2.1. Stage 1

To generate qualitative data, we downloaded relevant data from two Canadian newspapers with national scope (The Globe and Mail; National Post). We searched The Globe and Mail and National Post for the term “organ” in the title. All relevant articles (n = 258 for The Globe and Mail and n = 177 for the National Post) were downloaded as PDF files on 6 May 2013, and imported into ATLAS.ti©, a qualitative data analysis software. We then read all of the articles performing a hermeneutical keyword coding, while keeping in mind the research questions. For any given source, at least two authors performed the coding to increase reliability, and differences were resolved through discussion. Once coding was finished, we used ATLAS.ti© to generate the frequency of certain themes (quantitative data) and a list of quotations containing searched key words (qualitative data).

2.2.2. Stage 2

To generate quantitative data on the SRTDs we found mentioned in Stage 1 within and outside ODOT articles, we searched two databases. We accessed 300 Canadian newspapers published between 1977–2014 through the ProQuest database, “Canadian newsstand complete,” which we accessed through the University of Calgary library (10 March 2014). We accessed the National Post from 1998 (the first time the newspaper was published) to 2014 through the “Canadian newsstand complete”. We accessed The Globe and Mail through two databases accessible through the University of Calgary library (10 March 2014); we used the ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The Globe and Mail (1844–2010) database to gain all of the articles from the first time organ transplant and organ donation were mentioned (1963) to 2009, and for the years of 2010–2014, we accessed The Globe and Mail through the “Canadian newsstand complete”.
We employed two different search strategies to gain the hit counts for the SRTDs. To obtain quantitative data of the mentioning of Stage 1-identified SRTD’s in ODOT articles, we searched the databases in two steps. The first step identified all articles in the databases that contained the terms “organ transplantation” or “organ donation” in the full text. These articles where then searched in the second step for the SRTDs that we identified in Stage 1, and the results were recorded in 10-year sections to show a historical timeline of mentioning of the SRTDs within the ODOT-mentioning articles (Table A1, Table A2 and Table A3 at end of article after the references). To gain quantitative data on how often the SRTDs mentioned in ODOT articles analyzed in Stage 1 were mentioned outside of ODOT articles, we simply searched all of the databases for the appearance of the SRTDs identified in Stage 1 in the full text of articles, not limiting ourselves to ODOT articles (Table A1, Table A2 and Table A3 at end of article after the references).

2.3. Limitations

Although our study provided some quantitative data for n = 300 English language Canadian newspapers, it did not cover French language newspapers from Canada. The qualitative content analysis focused only on two Canadian newspapers with national reach. We also did not cover other media types. Given the sources we investigated, our results cannot be used to generalize our findings, whether for the whole of Canada, North America or beyond.

3. Results

3.1. What Technologies Are Mentioned?

Table A1, Table A2 and Table A3 (at end of article after the references) suggest a disconnect in all Canadian newspapers covered between the reporting of scientific and technological advancements that are applicable to ODOT and the actual coverage of such scientific and technological advancements within newspaper articles that cover ODOT. Table A1, Table A2 and Table A3 suggest further that certain SRTD topics are only covered for a certain time span. Terms linked to the use of animal organs for transplants, such as xenotransplantation, and terms, such as animal organs, animal, baboon, pig and sheep, are covered much less of not at all in the last 10 years. Technologies represented by the terms clon* and “stem cell” are two other examples that have seen a precipitous fall in appearance.

3.2. What Issues Are Mentioned in Relation to Scientific and Technological Advancements?

As to which issues are discussed related to SRTD covered in ODOT articles, the following were found.

3.2.1. Terms Ability, Abilities and Able

No article uses the terms “abilities” or “ability” to characterize a given scientific or technological advancement. As for the term “able”, a 1987 Globe and Mail article states “that an NMR scanner was able to detect increased muscle thickness in hearts that were being rejected by the body’s immune system” [79]. Other articles cover the genetically-engineered protein CTLA4Ig as a immunosuppressive with less side effects [80] and that injecting a human gene into a pig’s fertilized egg generates a protein in an animal that enables the human body to better accept animal organs [81] (see also [82]). In the National Post, a 2008 article states that a new method for refurbishing lungs should be able to increase the usability of lungs from 10% to 15% to 50%–60% [83]. In the article, containing the term scien*, the term “able” is not linked to any scientific or technological product or process.

3.2.2. Term Ethic*

Ethics is covered in the Globe and Mail in relation to reproductive technologies focusing on therapeutic cloning and selling of eggs and sperm, organ gathering procedures and black market problems, as well as animal organ transplant (whereby safety issues are seen as ethical ones) [84]. One article covers the growth of a new heart and states that there might be ethical issues without saying what they are [85]. As for the National Post, the term ethics has been showing up around websites matching donors and recipients for live organ transplant [86] and animals growing human organs [87]. In both cases, the ethical issues are not explicitly stated.
As for the articles containing the term scien*, two Globe and Mail articles cover animal organ transplantation [84,88] and one article covers replacement hearts [85]. As for the National Post, the only issue covered is xenotransplantation [87,89].

3.2.3. Term Cost

Only two articles mention cost and a technology in the same paragraph. One 1980 article in the Globe and Mail compares the cost of an organ transplant with a technology to be used, “The cost of transplanting a kidney is $5000. The cost of dialysis, for one year, is $20,000 to $30,000 and that’s strictly medical costs” [90]. One 2001 article in the National Post states that a new drug “ISAtx247 can be administered in smaller doses, is significantly less toxic and three to five times more potent than cyclosporine, suggesting the drug has the potential to improve a patient’s quality of life, which could also decrease health care costs” [91].
As for the articles in The Globe and Mail containing the term scien*, one mentions the cost of kidney dialysis [92], and another article compares the cost of transplant versus dialysis [93]. No articles in the National Post contained this term.

3.2.4. Term Risk

As for risk, four articles in the Globe and Mail and two in the National Post cover risk in relation to technologies. One Globe and Mail article credits the appearance of the drug cyclosporine as one factor for an increase in heart transplants due to a decrease in risk [94]. Another article highlights the advantage of NMR technology, “[a]t present, heart graft recipients must undergo at least eight biopsies (unpleasant procedures in which tiny samples of heart tissue are removed using an instrument inserted in the jugular vein) during the first three months after their operation. Five out of eight of the potentially dangerous biopsies could be replaced with risk-free NMR procedures” [79]. Some look into the risk of xenotransplantation, whereby some highlight ways to decrease risk [81], while others considered what are seen as risks [87]. As for the National Post, one 2002 article gives voice to the notion that xenotransplantation should not be performed till all the health risks are known [95], while another article highlights that bladders grown from one’s own cells and implanted reduces the risk of rejection [96].
As for how the term “risk” is used in the articles that mention scien* and are linked to a scientific/technological product or process, five articles cover risk in relation to xenotransplantation in the Globe and Mail, and one covers the risk of cyclosporine, an anti-rejection drug. As for the National Post, the only topic linked to risk in the context of ODOT is xenotransplantation, with one 2002 article stating, “Informed Canadians tended to conclude that the risks of xenotransplantation were greater than the benefits because of health risks and the scientific uncertainty surrounding these risks” [97].

3.2.5. Terms Law, Legislation and Guideline

As for the law and technology, only one Globe and Mail article covers it. “Those who want to change the law point out that we have often altered the rules on who’s alive and who isn’t. Technology produced some of the changes, as when the stethoscope (no heartbeat) replaced a hand mirror held to the nostrils (no breath)” [98]. One National Post article comments on using the Internet to match donors and recipients [86]. As for the term “law” used in the articles that mention scien*, none of the articles are linked to a scientific/technological product or process related to ODOT.
For the term “guidelines”, one 1995 and one 1998 Globe and Mail article mention U.S. guidelines related to xenotransplantation [84,99]. One 2001 National Post article covers Health Canada guidelines for xenotransplantation [100]; another article from 2012 covering the issue of being legally dead states, “The article also suggested that the guidelines abandoned “time-honored” safeguards, such as not declaring brain death until anticonvulsants, sedatives or other drugs that can bring about a death-like state have drained completely from the system” [101]. As for the term “guidelines” used in the articles that mention scien*, two articles in the Globe and Mail are linked to xenotransplantation [84,99]. As for the National Post, one article looks at the use of people whose hearts have stopped but still have brain functions as organ donors [102].
As for how the term “legislation” is used in the articles that mention tech*, “legislation” is used once in a 2002 National Post article about a government-sponsored report on xenotransplantation stating, “Moreover, the report says Canadians want “stringent and transparent legislation and regulations” to be enacted to ensure xenotransplantation—if it ever is allowed—is governed cautiously” [103].
As for how “legislation” is used in the articles that mention scien*, it is used in the same article from the National Post as stated above covering a government-sponsored report on xenotransplantation [103].

3.2.6. Term Concern

As for concerns, one Globe and Mail article states that concerns with heart transplants could be addressed with synthetically-/in dish-grown heart [85], and two others focused on xenotransplantation as a means to address the concern of the bad organ donation ratio in Canada [84,104]. The article in the National Post also focused on xenotransplantation [95]. As for how “concern” is used in the articles that mention scien* and are linked to a scientific/technological products or processes applicable to ODOT, xenotransplantation is mentioned in one Globe and Mail article [84] and one National Post article [95].

3.2.7. Term Problem

Issues that are voiced around the term problem in the Globe and Mail include: problems with xenotransplantation [99], ethical problems with growing hearts (without saying what the ethical problems are) [85], one mentioning of a specific drug that has the potential of solving one problem of organ transplantation (organ rejection) [80], another listing various solutions to the problem of organ rejection [105] and a third stating that xenotransplantation could decrease the problem of organ rejection [84]. In the National Post, one article highlights the problem of cryopreserving whole organs [106], problems with xenotransplantation [87] and cyclosporine [91]. As for how the term “problem” is used in the articles that mention scien* and are linked to a scientific/technological products or processes in ODOT, the Globe and Mail mentions aspects of xenotransplantation [99]. One article highlights the improvement in transplantation science, which is nearly irrelevant due to a shortage of organs [107], and another article focuses on the use of the protein, CTLA4Ig, to deal with rejection problems [80]. The National Post had one article highlighting xenotransplantation as an approach to resolve rejection problems [89], one on problems with cryopreservation [106] and one with the problem of harvesting “organs for transplant from people whose hearts have stopped but are not yet brain dead” [108].

3.2.8. Term Potential

The term potential is linked to potential problems of xenotransplantation [84] in the Globe and Mail. The National Post mentions ovary freezing as a potential breakthrough [106], the potential of pigs related to xenotransplantation [109], the potential health risks of xenotransplantation [103], the potential of a drug called ISAtx247 to replace cyclosporine, which would decrease the number of side effects in organ anti-rejection drugs [91], and using one’s own cells to grow bladders as a potential milestone to solve organ shortages [96]. One article states, “The British Columbia Transplant Society expects the demand for organ transplants in Canada to double by 2005 as the mortality rate continues to drop and more potential transplant candidates are sustained through technology” [110]. As for how “potential*” is used in articles that mention scien* and are linked to a scientific/technological product or process, one article in the Globe and Mail mentions that xenotransplantation could potentially cause diseases and have a potential dark side [84], and another article states that growing hearts “is also a chance for biomedical companies to get in on the ground floor of a potentially profitable business” [85]. In the National Post, the potential health risks of xenotransplantation [103,111], ovary freezing as a potential breakthrough [106] and using one’s own cells to grow bladders as a potential milestone to solve organ shortages [96] are mentioned.

3.2.9. Term Decision

Two articles in the Globe and Mail and two in the National Post cover the term “decision” in relation to a technology. One Globe and Mail article states about animal-human transplants, “A lot of the decisions of bio-technology are really decisions that affect all of us and these decisions are made by the so-called experts,” said Edna Einsiedel, professor of communications studies at the U of C and organizer of Saturday’s forum” [112]. Another covers the use of GPS to keep track of organs in transit, “The device also records and transmits data every 10 seconds on temperature, flow-rate, vascular resistance, and pressure to support surgical decisions” [113]. In the National Post, both articles cover xenotransplantation, with one article stating, “But on Monday, Graham Bulfield, director of the Roslin Institute in Edinburgh, said, “While xenotransplantation [organ transfer from one species to another] has raised a number of well-publicized issues such as possible infection with pig viruses, these were not the basis for the decision to refocus funding.” He said the reasons were commercial, not questions of safety” [114]. The second states, “Once a staple of science fiction, xenotransplantation is now considered a few years away. Last week, Health Canada announced a 14-month public consultation on the issue, promising that the public would have input into policy decisions” [111]. As for how “decision” is used in articles that mention scien*, no article was found in the Globe and Mail and only one article was found in the National Post that covers xenotransplantation [114].

3.2.10. Terms Awareness, Need and Education

The terms awareness, need and education are not used in combination with a technology or scien*, to just mention three terms that one might have expected.

4. Discussion

According to Entman, “frames call attention to some aspects of reality while obscuring other elements, which might lead audiences to have different reactions” [115], and frames in a news text are “really the imprint of power-it registers the identity of actors or interests that competed to dominate the text” [115]. Our study reveals a puzzling disconnect between ODOT coverage and the coverage of scientific and technological advancements used in ODOT; for example, the National Post had n = 79 articles that covered the technological advancements of artificial hearts. However, only n = 3 ODOT articles covered artificial hearts (Table A2). Similarly, n = 499 articles covered artificial hearts in The Globe and Mail in general, with the first article being from 1937. However, only n = 7 ODOT articles mention artificial hearts (Table A1). Finally, the same discrepancy is evident for the n = 300 newspapers from the Canadian newsstand complete database; n = 81 ODOT articles versus n = 2725 of non-ODOT articles that contain the term “artificial heart”. The same puzzling disconnect can be observed with other ODOT-linked scientific and technological advancements. We say puzzling because although it is known that newspapers are influenced by their environment, including ownership, funding, need for circulation, advertisement revenue and the readers preference for reading like-minded news [116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137], this should not hinder the coverage of ODOT-linked scientific and technological advancements within ODOT-covering articles, as the public is interested in this area and the topic should therefore fit funder and advertiser expectations. A lively discourse exists around how to report on scientific and technological advancements and how to increase the interest of the public in science and technology [138,139,140,141]; indeed, in the field of nanotechnology, the term “democratizing nanotechnology” is used to indicate the need to involve the public early on [142,143,144,145]. Although the newspapers cover scientific and technological advancements, including the ones relevant and applicable to ODOT, this reporting is not linked to ODOT. As a result, readers interested in ODOT do not gain much insight in ODOT-related scientific and technological advancements. The issue is not only about the lack of coverage, but that our content analysis of the ODOT articles that covered scientific and technological advancements found very few issues, whether positively or negatively raised. Even if issues were raised, for example in relation to xenotransplantation, the coverage of these issues used general statements without much elaboration. Furthermore, our findings indicate that for the three scientific and technological advancements covered most, xenotransplantation, cloning and stem cells, the peak of interest has passed. Indeed, very few articles covered these three areas in the last eight years. As for xenotransplantation, this might be due to a 2002 report on a public consultation on xenotransplantation released by the Canadian Public Health Association [146] and presented to Minister Rock responsible for Health Canada at that time. The report states, “In accordance with its mandate, the Public Advisory Group makes the following recommendations on xenotransplantation based on input from Canadians: 1. That Canada not proceed with xenotransplantation involving humans at this time as there are critical issues that first need to be resolved” [146].

5. Conclusions

Our findings that a disconnect seems to exist between the scientific and technological development of ODOT-relevant products and processes and the coverage of such advancements within the ODOT coverage of the newspapers have several implications for groups involved in ODOT. Numerous campaigns endeavor to increase the availability of organs [71]. The first campaign was in 1978 according to a Globe and Mail article [90], with articles stating that organ shortages will continue until the attitudes of people change [147] and that other campaigns, such as the ones discouraging drunk driving, cut down on the availability of brain-dead people as organ donors [148]. One Globe and Mail article states that public education campaigns do work [149] and that the problem is elsewhere, but it still states, “Canada’s organ donation rate, 15 per one million population, is one of the lowest in the developed world” [149]. The National Post also mentions in various articles that campaigns are under way with a 2012 article stating, “Months into the latest national campaign to recruit desperately needed organ donors, a legal scholar is arguing that new guidelines for declaring people brain dead and eligible for organ harvesting likely violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms” [150]. Given that campaigns are still ongoing, we suggest that the campaigns themselves have to consider changes that would include education on scientific and technological developments by writing foresight bulletins to alert people and get people involved in the governance of emerging scientific and technological developments. Currently, the newspaper coverage is not linking scientific and technological developments to ODOT. Therefore, campaigns could include social media sites where technological development updates are posted.
In general, the SRTD linked to ODOT discourse is another example, albeit a surprising one, of the inadequacy of newspaper coverage.

Acknowledgments

We want to thank Professor Chip Doig for his thoughts on the topic of ODOT

Author Contributions

Gregor Wolbring generated and supervised the research project. Jennifer Cheung did the research. Gregor Wolbring and Jennifer Cheung wrote the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ricklefs, F.; Schrepfer, S. Immunogenicity of Stem Cells. In Medical Advancements in Aging and Regenerative Technologies: Clinical Tools and Applications; Information Resources Management Association: Hershey, PA, USA, 2013; p. 96. [Google Scholar]
  2. George, A.; Larkin, D. Corneal transplantation: The forgotten graft. Am. J. Transplant. 2004, 4, 678–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Hamilton, D. Kidney Transplantation: A History. In Kidney Transplantation: Principles and Practice, 4th ed.; Morris, P.I., Ed.; Saunders: London, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  4. Jordaan, P. First Heart Transplant. AORN J. 1968, 8, 43–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Hardy, J.D.; Chavez, C.M. The first heart transplant in man: Developmental animal investigations with analysis of the 1964 case in the light of current clinical experiences. Am. J. Cardiol. 1968, 22, 772–781. [Google Scholar]
  6. Hardy, J. The First Lung Transplant in Man (1963) and the First Heart Transplant in Man (1964). Transplant. Proc. 1999, 31, 25–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Reichart, B.; Guethoff, S.; Mayr, T.; Thormann, M.; Buchholz, S.; Postrach, J.; Ayares, D.; Elliott, R.B.; Tan, P.; Kind, A. Discordant cardiac xenotransplantation: Broadening the horizons. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2014, 45, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Canadian Institite for Health Information (CIHI) e-Statistics on Organ Transplants, Waiting Lists and Donors. Available online: http://www.cihi.ca/CIHI-ext-portal/pdf/internet/REPORT_STATS2012_PDF_EN (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  9. US Department of Health and Human Services Why Donate. Available online: http://www.organdonor.gov/whydonate/index.html (accessed on 19 September 2013).
  10. Experts Discuss Organ Transplant Demand. Available online: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2013-06/09/content_16601433.htm (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  11. Truant, T. Stem-cell transplant. Available online: http://www.oncologyex.com/pdf/vol13_no1/landmarks_cano-truant-sct.pdf (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  12. Cooper, D.K.C.; Lanza, R.P. Xeno: The Promise of Transplanting Animal Organs into Humans; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  13. Lamm, V.; Hara, H.; Mammen, A.; Dhaliwal, D.; Cooper, D.K. Corneal blindness and xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation 2014, 21, 99–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Elia, J. Method for Growing Human Organs and Suborgans. US20020192198 A1, 19 December 2002. [Google Scholar]
  15. Mironov, V.; Boland, T.; Trusk, T.; Forgacs, G.; Markwald, R.R. Organ printing: Computer-aided jet-based 3D tissue engineering. TRENDS Biotechnol. 2003, 21, 157–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Tripathi, A.S. 3D organ printing: A future prospect of medical sciences in organ transplantation. Innovare J. Life Sci. 2013, 1, 10–17. [Google Scholar]
  17. Fischer, S. The Body Printed: How 3-D Printing Could Change the Face of Modern Medicine? And Why That Future Is Still So Far Away. Pulse IEEE 2013, 4, 27–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Harrington, L. Technology and the Digitization of Health Care. AACN Adv. Crit. Care 2014, 25, 15–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Malchesky, P.S. Artificial Organ Technologies Around the World. Artif. Organ. 2014, 38, 99–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Pal, S. Overview of Human System and Its Artificial Replacement. In Design of Artificial Human Joints & Organs; Springer: Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  21. Pal, S. The Liver and Its Artificial Replacement. In Design of Artificial Human Joints & Organs; Springer: Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 353–359. [Google Scholar]
  22. Pal, S. The Kidney and Its Artificial Replacement. In Design of Artificial Human Joints & Organs; Springer: Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 311–328. [Google Scholar]
  23. Kwan-Gett, C.; Wu, Y.; Collan, R.; Jacobsen, S.; Kolff, W. Total replacement artificial heart and driving system with inherent regulation of cardiac output. ASAIO J. 1969, 15, 245–250. [Google Scholar]
  24. Implantable Body Actuated Artificial Heart System. US3518702, 7 July 1970.
  25. DeVries, W.C.; Anderson, J.L.; Joyce, L.D.; Anderson, F.L.; Hammond, E.H.; Jarvik, R.K.; Kolff, W.J. Clinical use of the total artificial heart. N. Engl. J. Med. 1984, 310, 273–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Nose, Y., Dr.; Willem, J. Kolff: The godfather of artificial organ technologies (14 February 1911–11 February 2009). Artif. Organ. 2009, 33, 389–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Firszt, J.B.; Holden, L.K.; Reeder, R.M.; Skinner, M.W. Speech recognition in cochlear implant recipients: Comparison of standard HiRes and HiRes 120 sound processing. Otol. Neurotol. 2009, 30, 146–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Ossur. Bionic Knee. Available online: http://www.ossur.com/prosthetic-solutions/products/knees-and-legs (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  29. Donoghue, J.P. Bridging the brain to the world: A perspective on neural interface systems. Neuron 2008, 60, 511–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Miller, G. Neurotechnology. Engineering a fix for broken nervous systems. Science 2008, 322, 847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Thought Controlled Wheelchair. 2007. Available online: http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/ambient-audeo (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  32. Artificial Muscle INC. Artificial Muscle. 2009. Available online: http://www.artificialmuscle.com/technology (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  33. Gura, V.; Ronco, C.; Davenport, A. The wearable artificial kidney, why and how: From holy grail to reality. Semin. Dial. 2009, 22, 13–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Bañares, R.; Catalina, M.-V.; Vaquero, J. Liver support systems: Will they ever reach prime time? Curr. Gastroenterol. Rep. 2013, 15, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Qin, J.; Zhang, W.; Wu, G.; Wang, C. Bionic design of articular cartilage. Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi. 2008, 25, 182–185. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  36. Scipione, C.N.; Schewe, R.E.; Koch, K.L.; Shaffer, A.W.; Iyengar, A.; Cook, K.E. Use of a low-resistance compliant thoracic artificial lung in the pulmonary artery to pulmonary artery configuration. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2013, 145, 1660–1666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Zhou, K.; Niu, S.; Bianchi, G.; Wei, X.; Garimella, N.; Griffith, B.P.; Wu, Z.J. Biocompatibility Assessment of a Long-Term Wearable Artificial Pump-Lung in Sheep. Artif. Organs 2013, 37, 678–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Shin, D.A.; Yi, S.; Yoon, D.H.; Kim, K.N.; Shin, H.C. Artificial disc replacement combined with fusion versus two-level fusion in cervical two-level disc disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976.) 2009, 34, 1153–1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Rauschmann, M.A.; Thalgott, J.; Fogarty, M.; Nichlos, M.; Kleinszig, G.; Knap, M.; Kafchitsas, K. Insertion of the artificial disc replacement: A cadaver study comparing the conventional surgical technique and the use of a navigation system. Spine (Phila Pa 1976.) 2009, 34, 1110–1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International (JDRF) (USA). Rtificial Pancreas Project. 2015. Available online: http://jdrf.org/research/treat/artificial-pancreas-project/ (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  41. Ren Zheng, M.M.; Gongping Li, B.M.; Hao He, M.M.; Yinghe, L.M.D. Bionic dental pulp: Its potential value following root canal therapy. Med. Hypotheses 2009, 72, 129–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Livescience.com. Bionics Gives Blind Woman Partial Vision. 2009. Available online: http://www.livescience.com/12550-bionics-blind-woman-partial-vision.html (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  43. Hickey, H. Contact Lenses with Circuits, Lights a Possible Platform for Superhuman Vision. 2008. Available online: http://www.washington.edu/news/2008/01/17/contact-lenses-with-circuits-lights-a-possible-platform-for-superhuman-vision/ (accessed 7 April 2015).
  44. Jarvis, A. The Bionic Eye: Latest in Med-Tech How a Miniature Telescope could Help Patients with Damaged Retinas. 2009. Available online: http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/the-bionic-eye-latest-in-med-tech-617848 (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  45. Hewitt, J. Wireless, Solar-Powered Bionic Eyes Benefit from Sub-Retinal Placement. Available online: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/159236-wireless-solar-powered-bionic-eyes-benefit-from-sub-retinal-placement (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  46. Herr, H.M.; Grabowski, A.M. Bionic ankle-foot prosthesis normalizes walking gait for persons with leg amputation. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 2012, 279, 457–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Strickland, E. Good-bye, wheelchair. IEEE Spectrum 2012, 49, 30–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Rosen, R. Bionics Revisited. In The Machine as Metaphor and Tool; Haken, H., Karlqvist, A., Svedin, U., Eds.; Springer: Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 1993; pp. 87–100. [Google Scholar]
  49. Wallace, G.G.; Moulton, S.E.; Wang, C. Organic Bionic. 2010. Available online: http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/the-bionic-eye-latest-in-med-tech-617848 (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  50. Singer, P. Xenotransplantation and speciesism. Transplant. Proc. 1992, 24, 728–732. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  51. Caplan, A.L. Organ transplants: The costs of success. Hastings Cent. Rep. 1983, 13, 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Caplan, A.L. Ethical and policy issues in the procurement of cadaver organs for transplantation. N. Engl. J. Med. 1984, 311, 981–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Caplan, A.L.; Siegler, M. Risks, paternalism, and the gift of life. Arch. Intern.Med. 1985, 145, 1188–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Caplan, A.L. Organ transplant rationing: A window to the future? Health Prog. 1987, 68, 40–45. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  55. Caplan, A.L. Equity in the selection of recipients for cardiac transplants. Circulation 1987, 75, 10–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Caplan, A.L. Ethical issues in the use of anencephalic infants as a source of organs and tissues for transplantation. Transplant. Proc. 1988, 20, 42–49. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  57. Daar, A.S.; Bhatt, A.; Court, E.; Singer, P.A. Stem cell research and transplantation: Science leading ethics. Transplant. Proc. 2004, 36, 2504–2506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Warwick, R.; Armitage, S. Cord blood banking. Best Prac. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2004, 18, 995–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Carroll, C. The ethics of heart transplantation. J. Natl. Med. Assoc. 1970, 62, 14. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  60. Sørensen, K.; Obiribea, M.; Calderon, E.; Niclasen, L. Stem Cell Research and Ethics Medical Risks and Ethical Implications. Available online: http://rudar.ruc.dk/bitstream/1800/13190/1/Stem%20Cell%20Research%20and%20Ethics%20Medical%20Risks%20and%20Ethical%20Implications.pdf (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  61. Kielstein, R.; Sass, H.M. From wooden limbs to biomaterial organs: The ethics of organ replacement and artificial organs. Artif. Organ. 1995, 19, 475–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hansson, S.O. Implant ethics. J. Med. Ethics 2005, 31, 519–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Cameron, A.; Massie, A.; Alexander, C.; Stewart, B.; Montgomery, R.; Benavides, N.; Fleming, G.; Segev, D. Social Media and Organ Donor Registration: The Facebook Effect. Am. J. Transplant. 2013, 13, 2059–2065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Jeong, H.; Park, H.S. The Effect of Parasocial Interaction on Intention to Register as Organ Donors Through Entertainment-Education Programs in Korea. Asia Pac. J. Public Health 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Nadel, M.S.; Nadel, C.A. Using Reciprocity To Motivate Organ Donations. Yale J. Health Policy Law Ethics 2013, 5, 5. [Google Scholar]
  66. Frates, J.; Bohrer, G.G.; Thomas, D. Promoting organ donation to Hispanics: The role of the media and medicine. J. Health Commun. 2006, 11, 683–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Alvaro, E.M.; Siegel, J.T.; Crano, W.D.; Dominick, A. A mass mediated intervention on Hispanic live kidney donation. J. Health Commun. 2010, 15, 374–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Morgan, S.E. The intersection of conversation, cognitions, and campaigns: The social representation of organ donation. Commun. Theory 2009, 19, 29–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Harrison, T.R.; Morgan, S.E.; King, A.J.; Di Corcia, M.J.; Williams, E.A.; Ivic, R.K.; Hopeck, P. Promoting the Michigan Organ Donor Registry: Evaluating the impact of a multifaceted intervention utilizing media priming and communication design. Health Commun. 2010, 25, 700–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Wakefield, M.A.; Loken, B.; Hornik, R.C. Use of mass media campaigns to change health behaviour. Lancet 2010, 376, 1261–1271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Feeley, T.H.; Moon, S.-I. A meta-analytic review of communication campaigns to promote organ donation. Commun. Rep. 2009, 22, 63–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Oz, M.C.; Kherani, A.R.; Rowe, A.; Roels, L.; Crandall, C.; Tomatis, L.; Young, J.B. How to improve organ donation: Results of the ISHLT/FACT poll. J. Heart Lung Transplant. 2003, 22, 389–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Entman, R.M. Symposium Framing US Coverage of International News: Contrasts in narratives of the KAL and Iran Air incidents. J. Commun. 1991, 41, 6–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Benford, R.D. An Insiderʼs Critique of the Social Movement Framing Perspective*. Sociol. Inq. 1997, 67, 409–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Scheufele, D.A. Framing as a theory of media effects. J. Commun. 1999, 49, 103–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. De Vreese, C.H. News framing: Theory and typology. Inf. Des. J. Doc. Des. 2005, 13, 51–62. [Google Scholar]
  77. Spiller, N. ME++: The cyborg self and the networked city. Architec. Rev. 2004, 215, 104. [Google Scholar]
  78. Collins, P.A.; Abelson, J.; Pyman, H.; Lavis, J.N. Are we expecting too much from print media? An analysis of newspaper coverage of the 2002 Canadian healthcare reform debate. Soc. Sci. Med. 2006, 63, 89–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Helwig, D. Transplantation of organs added to NMR procedure. The Globe and Mail, 10 February 1987; B10. [Google Scholar]
  80. Mail, G.A. New protein may help prevent organ rejection Tests on mice show transplant success. The Globe and Mail, 7 August 1992; A9. [Google Scholar]
  81. Abraham, C. Transplant team developing animal organs for human use Canadian researchers aim to ease shortage of donors. The Globe and Mail, 6 January 1999; A1. [Google Scholar]
  82. Mail, G.A. Toronto Hospital a world leader in critical organ research. The Globe and Mail, 25 May 1998; C4. [Google Scholar]
  83. Blackwell, T. Doctors unveil “amazing” organ transfer method; “Exciting Advance”. National Post, 20 December 2008; A8. [Google Scholar]
  84. Taylor, P. Medical miracle has potential dark side Animal-organ transplants may soon become commonplace, but experts warn bacteria may be carried over as well. And once a microbial stowaway enters the human population, thereʼs no knowing what harm it could do. The Globe and Mail, 3 January 1998; A4. [Google Scholar]
  85. Judge, M.D. Have a heart As the number of organ-transplant donors declines, an international team of researchers at the University of Toronto proposes to construct human hearts outside the body. The Globe and Mail, 18 July 1998; D5. [Google Scholar]
  86. Vallis, M. Web site finds organ donors, for a price. National Post, 10 April 2004; A1. [Google Scholar]
  87. Greenwood, J. Biotechʼs Lion the Richard Hearted IPO raises $30M for animals with “human” organs. National Post, 18 July 2000; C01. [Google Scholar]
  88. Barnes, J. Transpigging organs. The Globe and Mail, 13 January 1999; A18. [Google Scholar]
  89. Greenwood, J. Swine ambition Can humans learn to live with hearts and other organs from pigs? National Post, 20 Sepetember 2000; 0-C01. [Google Scholar]
  90. Sawyer, D. Organ donor program faces obstacles. The Globe and Mail, 20 November 1980; T3. [Google Scholar]
  91. Arnold, T. Firm touts transplant drug as “bullʼs-eye”: Fights organ rejection: Pharmaceutical companies pursue Edmonton discovery. National Post, 31 August 2001; A1. [Google Scholar]
  92. Helwig, D. Transplant doctor wants right to take organs. The Globe and Mail, 13 October 1982; P1. [Google Scholar]
  93. Salem, A. SURGERY The science of spare parts Organ transplanting has always operated at the outer boundaries of the knowable and the doable. That said, Mickey Mantle probably wouldnʼt have qualified for a new liver at any of Canadaʼs 29 transplant centres. The Globe and Mail, 26 August 1995; D8. [Google Scholar]
  94. Strauss, S. Short supplies of organs mean life and death wait. The Globe and Mail, 8 December 1983; 0. [Google Scholar]
  95. Kennedy, M. Pig-organ transplants on horizon, doctors say: As early as three years. National Post, 21 Sepetember 2002; A1. [Google Scholar]
  96. Kirkey, S. Man-made bladders may solve organ crisis: “Extremely exciting”. National Post, 4 April 2006; A11. [Google Scholar]
  97. Kennedy, M. Report casts cautious eye on xenotransplantation: Transplants using animal organs seen as premature. Edmonton Journal, 7 January 2002; A2. [Google Scholar]
  98. Hilton, B. MIND & MATTER Could anencephalic babies be used as organ donors? The Globe and Mail, 1 July 1995; D8. [Google Scholar]
  99. Mail, G.A. Beasts as organ-donors: Thanks, but no thanks MEDICINE/Even if we put aside misgivings about the morality of the act, a problem remains: If we transplant animalsʼ organs into humans, infectious agents will surely be transplanted too. The Globe and Mail, 23 October 1995; A17. [Google Scholar]
  100. Blackwell, T. Animal organs may cause new epidemic: Report: AIDS, mad cow cited (Toronto edition headline.); Transplanting animal organs might start new epidemic: Report: AIDS, mad cow cited (All but Toronto edition headline.). National Post, 10 August 2001; A8. [Google Scholar]
  101. Blackwell, T. Ethicist seeks law to say when dead is truly dead; Cites growing use of organs from cardiac victims. National Post, 17 July 2009; A1. [Google Scholar]
  102. Therien, E. Making hard choices on organ transplants; Accepting donations from patients whose hearts stopped before their brains died will help ease desperate shortages. National Post, 22 April 2013; A14. [Google Scholar]
  103. Kennedy, M. Report puts brakes on animal organ transplants. National Post, 7 January 2002; A7. [Google Scholar]
  104. Freeze, C. Patientʼs plight reflects a larger crisis Dying manʼs need for donated lung shared by 3000 Canadians awaiting organ transplants. The Globe and Mail, 8 Feburary 1999; A12. [Google Scholar]
  105. Pipe, A. PERSONAL HEALTH Organ donation can snatch life from the jaws of death. The Globe and Mail, 26 April 1990; A8. [Google Scholar]
  106. Kirkey, S. Fertility and the freezer: Researchers have removed an ovary, frozen it, and replaced the defrosted organ so it could resume ovulating Series: Scienceʼs Next Frontiers. National Post, 24 January 2002; A15. [Google Scholar]
  107. AndrÉ, P. Supply lags demand in organ transplants Canadaʼs record for donations among worst in Western world; number of patients waiting up by 68 per cent over decade. The Globe and Mail, 15 July 1998; A3. [Google Scholar]
  108. Soupcoff, M. The Donor Debate; Are doctors hastening patientsʼ deaths to harvest their organs? We shouldnʼt have to ask. National Post, 16 Sepemtember 2010; A16. [Google Scholar]
  109. National Post. Barnyard organ factories. National Post, 17 August 2000; A19. [Google Scholar]
  110. Vallis, M. Organ donor plan flawed: Report: Canada too safe to match Spainʼs cadaveric donations. National Post, 19 April 2001; A9. [Google Scholar]
  111. Evenson, B. Cloned pig could supply human organs: Rival teams use different cloning techniques: “Xena” seen as breakthrough in march toward animal-to-human transplantation. National Post, 17 August 2000; A1–A16. [Google Scholar]
  112. Summerfield, R. Public gets say in policy on animal organ transplants: Calgary group grills experts on ethics, costs. Calgary Herald, 19 November 2000; D2. [Google Scholar]
  113. Healing, D. Calgary firm helps donor organs stay on track. Calgary Herald, 15 December 2010; E1. [Google Scholar]
  114. National Post. Cloners abandon pig organ transplants: Fear of viruses reported. National Post, 16 August 2000; A17. [Google Scholar]
  115. Entman, R.M. Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. J. Commun. 1993, 43, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Reese, S.D. Understanding the global journalist: A hierarchy-of-influences approach. Journal. Stud. 2001, 2, 173–187. [Google Scholar]
  117. Price, C.J. Interfering owners or meddling advertisers: How network television news correspondents feel about ownership and advertiser influence on news stories. J. Media Econ. 2003, 16, 175–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Winseck, D. Netscapes of power: Convergence, consolidation and power in the Canadian mediascape. Media Cult. Soc. 2002, 24, 795–819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Gilens, M.; Hertzman, C. Corporate ownership and news bias: Newspaper coverage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. J. Polit. 2000, 62, 369–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Anderson, A. Media, politics and climate change: Towards a new research agenda. Sociol. Compass 2009, 3, 166–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Schudson, M. The news media as political institutions. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2002, 5, 249–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Baer, W.S.; Geller, H.; Grundfest, J.A.; Possner, K.B. Concentration of Mass Media Ownership: Assessing the State of Current Knowledge; Rand Corporation: Santa Monica, CA, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
  123. Allport, G.W.; Faden, J.M. The Psychology of Newspapers: Five Tentative Laws. Public Opin. Q. 1940, 4, 687–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Tilley, E.; Hollings, J. Still stuck in “A Love-Hate Relationship”: Understanding Journalists’ Enduring and Impassioned Duality towards Public Relations. In Proceedings of the ANZCA 2008 Conference, Wellington, New Zealand, 9–11 July 2008.
  125. Shoemaker, P.J.; Vos, T.P.; Reese, S.D. Journalists as Gatekeepers. In Handbook of Journalism Studies, International Communication Association Handbook Series; Wahl-Jorgensen, K., Hanitzsch, T., Eds.; Routlege/Lawrance Erlbaum: London, UK, 2009; pp. 73–87. [Google Scholar]
  126. McCauley, M.; Blake, K.; Meissner, H.; Viswanath, K. The social group influences of US health journalists and their impact on the newsmaking process. Health Educ. Res. 2013, 28, 339–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Sill, K.L.; Metzgar, E.T.; Rouse, S.M. Media Coverage of the US Supreme Court: How Do Journalists Assess the Importance of Court Decisions? Polit. Commun. 2013, 30, 58–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Weaver, D.; Elliott, S.N. Who sets the agenda for the media? A study of local agenda-building. Journal. Q. 1985, 62, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Carragee, K.M.; Roefs, W. The neglect of power in recent framing research. J. Commun. 2004, 54, 214–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Bulkow, K.; Urban, J.; Schweiger, W. The Duality of Agenda-Setting: The Role of Information Processing. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 2013, 25, 43–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Illia, L.; Lurati, F.; Casalaz, R. Situational Theory of Publics: Exploring a Cultural Ethnocentric Bias. J. Public Relat. Res. 2013, 25, 93–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Roberts, M.; McCombs, M. Agenda setting and political advertising: Origins of the news agenda. Polit. Commun. 1994, 11, 249–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Abbring, J.H.; Van Ours, J.C. Selling news and advertising space: The economics of Dutch newspapers. Economist 1994, 142, 151–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Reddaway, W.B. The economics of newspapers. Econ. J. 1963, 73, 201–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. George, L. What’s fit to print: The effect of ownership concentration on product variety in daily newspaper markets. Inf. Econ. Policy 2007, 19, 285–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. White, J.M. Source choice in agricultural news coverage: Impacts of reporter specialization and newspaper location, ownership, and circulation. Texas A&M University, repository.tamu.edu, 2013. Available online: http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-1033/WHITE-DISSERTATION.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  137. Gentzkow, M.; Shapiro, J.M. What drives media slant? Evidence from US daily newspapers. Econometrica 2010, 78, 35–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. McGinn, M.K.; Roth, W.-M. Preparing students for competent scientific practice: Implications of recent research in science and technology studies. Educ. Res. 1999, 28, 14–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Pellechia, M.G. Trends in science coverage: A content analysis of three US newspapers. Public Underst. Sci. 1997, 6, 49–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Ren, F.; Zhai, J. Science & Technology Communication and Popularization and Public Scientific Literacy Construction. In Communication and Popularization of Science and Technology in China; Springer: Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 159–207. [Google Scholar]
  141. Ren, F.; Zhai, J. History of Science & Technology Communication & Popularization. In Communication and Popularization of Science and Technology in China; Springer: Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 1–33. [Google Scholar]
  142. Wolbring, G. Nanotechnology for Democracy versus Democratization of Nanotechnology. In Little by Little: Expansions of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies; Lente, H.V., Coenen, C., Fleischer, T., Konrad, K., Krabbenborg, L., Milburn, C., Thoreau, F., Eds.; AKA-Verlag/IOS Press: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  143. Chen, M.-F.; Lin, Y.-P.; Cheng, T.-J. Public attitudes toward nanotechnology applications in Taiwan. Technovation 2013, 33, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Conley, S.N. Anticipatory Governance in Practice? Nanotechnology Policy in Cambridge, Massachusetts. In Nanotechnology, the Brain, and the Future; Springer: Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 373–392. [Google Scholar]
  145. Guston, D. Understanding “anticipatory governance”. Soc. Stud. Sci. 2014, 44, 218–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Canadian Public Health Association. Animal-to-Human Transplantation: Should Canada Proceed: A Public Consultation on Xenotransplantation; Canadian Public Health Association: Ottaw, ON, Canada, 2001. Available online: http://www.cpha.ca/uploads/progs/_/xeno/execsum_e.pdf (accessed on 7 April 2015).
  147. Kelly, C. Shortages of organs for transplants to continue until attitudes change. The Globe and Mail, 2 June 1986; A16. [Google Scholar]
  148. The Globe and Mail. Organ transplants down, experts say. The Globe and Mail, 4 April 1995; A3. [Google Scholar]
  149. Picard, A. General hospitals doing poor job of procuring organs. The Globe and Mail, 3 April 2013; L6. [Google Scholar]
  150. Blackwell, T. “Legally dead” may still be alive; Organ donor guidelines against Charter: Lawyer. National Post, 29 August 2012; A1. [Google Scholar]

Appendix A

Table
Table A1. Hit counts of keywords in The Globe and Mail from 1844–2014. ODOT, organ transplantation and organ donation.
Table A1. Hit counts of keywords in The Globe and Mail from 1844–2014. ODOT, organ transplantation and organ donation.
KeywordTerms Linked to ODOT Total 1844–2014Before 19801980–19891990–19992000–20092010–2014Terms not Linked to ODOT 1844–1979/1980–2014
Scien*301, first 196986510810020203,612/104,262, first 1936
Tech*156, first 1969441634351,408,264/139,855, first 1936
Tissue1111118205210112,481/7677
Mech*7061230193406,246/36,742
Animal695122625126,613/463,032
Dialysis68410202212253/53, first 1946
Artificial20, first 19651764227,899/12,333, first 1936
Clon*17009800/4301
Pig150393081,958/6442
Sheep101072094,482/7230
“Stem cell”9000811164/774, first 1963
Embryo9014402733/1647, first 1936
Baboon8024202469/323
Xenot*7005200/89, first 1995, last 2006
“Artificial heart”401110499/305, first 1937
Transgenic400310196/137, first 1983
“Mechanical heart”300021113/82, first 1937
“Animal organ”2002009/8, first 1988
Bionic2020001845/369, first 1945
“Tissue engineering”100010519/39
“3-D print”0000000/17
“Artificial ear”00000046/6
“Artificial kidney”000000253/53, first 1946
“Artificial organ”00000022/19, first 1949
Prosthetic00000010,217/639
Table
Table A2. Hit counts of keywords in the National Post 1998–2014.
Table A2. Hit counts of keywords in the National Post 1998–2014.
KeywordAll Together 1998–2014 ODOT Related1998–19992000–20092010–2014All Together without Confined to ODOT
Tissue731048153496
Scien*485301350,076
Tech*35424777,787
Dialysis305196465
Clon*1421112698
Pig1321013490
Mech*1215617,237
Transgenic8170206
Artificial70434732
Embryo7160687
Sheep41303014
“Stem cell”4040785
Baboon303092
“Artificial heart”301279
Xenot*101025
“Mechanical heart”100113
Prosthetic0000448
Bionic0000190
“Tissue engineering”000026
“Animal organ”000013
“Artificial kidney”000011
“3-D print’00002
“Artificial ear”00002
“Artificial organ”00000
Table
Table A3. Hit counts of keywords in the complete Canadian newsstand from 1980 to 2014.
Table A3. Hit counts of keywords in the complete Canadian newsstand from 1980 to 2014.
KeywordTerms Linked to ODOT 1980–2014Before 19801980–19891990–19992000–20092010–2014Terms not Linked to ODOT 1980–2014
Tissue334541604811843857112,481
Scien*2810321071415673161,230,517
Tech*136811343337611401,408,265
Animal85816226144846463,062
Clon*5091101143741454,862
Artificial46218212520748122,434
Mech*4601548724278406,426
Pig3981191512131381,958
Sheep24507811431294,482
“Stem cell”2320071893613,995
Embryo2110852142911,855
Xenot*2010081117 (last one 2004)2505
Baboon1280218619 (last 2006)12469
“Animal organ”96065238 (last 2006)0140
“Artificial heart”810231830112725
Transgenic6100332701908
Dialysis46044362331
“Mechanical heart”420432411708
Prosthetic2200313610,217
“Tissue engineering”1200235519
Bionic11020814796
“Artificial organ”81204172
“Artificial ear”10100046
“3-D print”00000035
“Artificial kidney”0000000

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cheung, J.; Wolbring, G. Analysis of the Science and Technology Narrative within Organ Donation and Transplantation Coverage in Canadian Newspapers. Technologies 2015, 3, 74-93. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies3020074

AMA Style

Cheung J, Wolbring G. Analysis of the Science and Technology Narrative within Organ Donation and Transplantation Coverage in Canadian Newspapers. Technologies. 2015; 3(2):74-93. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies3020074

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cheung, Jennifer, and Gregor Wolbring. 2015. "Analysis of the Science and Technology Narrative within Organ Donation and Transplantation Coverage in Canadian Newspapers" Technologies 3, no. 2: 74-93. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies3020074

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop