SynthesisRevista de saude publica2015
Gender in the allocation of organs in kidney transplants: meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Revista de saude publica, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Role of surgery in treating epstein-barr virus-associated smooth muscle tumor (EBV-SMT) with central nervous system invasion: A systemic review from 1997 to 2019.Cancer medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Access to treatment in chronic kidney disease, dialysis and transplantation. Is there gender equality?Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- Impact of Size Matching Based on Donor-Recipient Height on Kidney Transplant Outcomes.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2022Observational
- Article
- Association of Sex with Risk of Kidney Graft Failure Differs by Age.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2017Article
- Influence of donor-recipient sex mismatch on long-term survival of pancreatic grafts.Scientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledOBJECTIVE To analyze whether gender influence survival results of kidney transplant grafts and patients.METHODS Systematic review with meta-analysis of cohort studies available on Medline (PubMed), LILACS, CENTRAL, and Embase databases, including manual searching and in the grey literature. The selection of studies and the collection of data were conducted twice by independent reviewers, and disagreements were settled by a third reviewer. Graft and patient survival rates were evaluated as effectiveness measurements. Meta-analysis was conducted with the Review Manager® 5.2 software, through the application of a random effects model. Recipient, donor, and donor-recipient gender comparisons were evaluated.
resultsTwenty-nine studies involving 765,753 patients were included. Regarding graft survival, those from male donors were observed to have longer survival rates as compared to the ones from female donors, only regarding a 10-year follow-up period. Comparison between recipient genders was not found to have significant differences on any evaluated follow-up periods. In the evaluation between donor-recipient genders, male donor-male recipient transplants were favored in a statistically significant way. No statistically significant differences were observed in regards to patient survival for gender comparisons in all follow-up periods evaluated.CONCLUSIONS The quantitative analysis of the studies suggests that donor or recipient genders, when evaluated isolatedly, do not influence patient or graft survival rates. However, the combination between donor-recipient genders may be a determining factor for graft survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.