Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27923612›Full record

Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2017

Protocol of the KTFT-TALK study to reduce racial disparities in kidney transplant evaluation and living donor kidney transplantation.

Kellee Bornemann, Emilee Croswell, Menna Abaye, Cindy L Bryce, Chung-Chou H Chang, Deborah S Good, Cathleen A Freehling Heiles, Mary Amanda Dew, L Ebony Boulware, Amit D Tevar and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Interventions for increasing solid organ donor registration.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Predicting Kidney Transplant Evaluation Non-attendance.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kellee BornemannDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Emilee CroswellDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Menna AbayeDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Cindy L BryceDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Department of Health Policy and Management, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Chung-Chou H ChangDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Pittsburgh VA Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Department of Biostatistics, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Deborah S GoodStarzl Transplant Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Cathleen A Freehling HeilesStarzl Transplant Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Mary Amanda DewDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Department of Biostatistics, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
L Ebony BoulwareDivision of General Internal Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, United States.
Amit D TevarDepartment of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Starzl Transplant Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Larissa MyaskovskyDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Pittsburgh VA Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Center for Bioethics and Health Law, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States. Electronic address: myaskov@pitt.edu.
University of Pittsburgh · USUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center · USVA Pittsburgh Healthcare System · USDuke University · US

Funding

Increasing Equity in Transplant Evaluation and Living Donor Kidney TransplantationR01DK101715 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI DEW, MARY AMANDA · 2014 to 2018
$2.7M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK101715
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the optimal treatment for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). The evaluation process for a kidney transplant is complex, time consuming, and burdensome to the ESKD patient. Also, race disparities exist in rates of transplant evaluation completion, transplantation, and LDKT. In December 2012 our transplant center implemented a streamlined, one-day evaluation process, dubbed Kidney Transplant Fast Track (KTFT). This paper describes the protocol of a two-part study to evaluate the effectiveness of KTFT at increasing transplant rates (compared to historical controls) and the TALK intervention (Talking About Live Kidney Donation) at increasing LDKT during KTFT. All participants will receive the KTFT evaluation as part of their usual care. Participants will be randomly assigned to TALK versus no-TALK conditions. Patients will undergo interviews at pre-transplant work-up and transplant evaluation. Transplant status will be tracked via medical records. Our aims are to: (1) test the efficacy and cost effectiveness of the KTFT in reducing time to complete kidney transplant evaluation, and increasing kidney transplant rates relative to standard evaluation practices; (2) test whether TALK increases rates of LDKT during KTFT; and (3) determine whether engaging in a streamlined and coordinated-care evaluation experience within the transplant center reduces negative perceptions of the healthcare system. The results of this two-pronged approach will help pave the way for other transplant centers to implement a fast-track system at their sites, improve quality of care by transplanting a larger number of vulnerable patients, and address stark race/ethnic disparities in rates of LDKT.

Indexed as

EthnicityLiving DonorsBlack or African AmericanHealthcare DisparitiesHispanic or LatinoHistorically Controlled StudyHumansIndians, North AmericanKidney Failure, ChronicKidney TransplantationWhite People

Identifiers

PMID27923612
PMCPMC5274577
OpenAlexW2560410081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.