ArticleDer Internist2016
[Allocation systems in transplantation medicine: Advantages and disadvantages].
Article in Der Internist, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review of Public Preferences for the Allocation of Donor Organs for Transplantation: Principles of Distributive Justice.The patient · 2019Pooled it
- [Malignant neoplasms and transplantation].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Donor organs for transplantations are a scarce commodity; therefore, allocation systems are needed that guarantee an ethically acceptable distribution to patients on the waiting list (equal treatment and fairness) but also take the probability of survival of the transplant in each recipient into consideration. In this article the allocation systems for lung, liver, kidney and pancreas transplants are presented.For lung transplantations an allocation system based on the lung allocation score (LAS) is currently used. The LAS predicts the probability of survival on the waiting list and the survival rate following transplantation. Organs with a limited range of utilization are distributed in a so-called mini-match procedure.For post-mortem kidney and pancreas transplantations a relatively complex but transparent allocation system has been created in which patients are subdivided into groups, each of which has its own allocation rules. The allocation is principally carried out according to criteria of fairness of distribution and according to the prospects of success. The probability of a mismatch also plays a role. The urgency is important for children and for patients who do not have the possibility of dialysis. Combined pancreas and kidney transplantations have priority over kidney transplantations alone.The criterion for the urgency of liver transplantation in Germany is currently the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), which aims to reduce the waiting list mortality and to prioritize transplantations for those most in need. Because the system insufficiently describes the priority of transplantation for patients with tumors or genetic liver diseases, there is an additional set of rules for so-called standard exceptions.
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.