Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29802802›Full record

ArticleTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation2018

Reported effects of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients 5-tier rating system on US transplant centers: results of a national survey.

Sarah E Van Pilsum Rasmussen, Alvin G Thomas, Jacqueline Garonzik-Wang, Macey L Henderson, Sarah S Stith, Dorry L Segev, Lauren Hersch Nicholas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Health Care Provider Clustering Using Fusion Penalty in Quasi-Likelihood.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2024
    Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Sarah E Van Pilsum RasmussenDepartment of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4644-3590
Alvin G ThomasDepartment of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4911-8192
Jacqueline Garonzik-WangDepartment of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Macey L HendersonDepartment of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sarah S StithDepartment of Economics, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
Dorry L SegevDepartment of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Lauren Hersch NicholasDepartment of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

Long-Term Health Outcomes After Live Kidney Donation in African AmericansR01DK096008 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SEGEV, DORRY L. · 2013 to 2017
$3.8M
Patient Oriented Research in Kidney Disease and Transplant SurgeryK24DK101828 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SEGEV, DORRY L. · 2014 to 2018
$922k
Geographic Variation in the Health and Economic Determinants and Outcomes of ElecK01AG041763 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI NICHOLAS, LAUREN HERSCH · 2012 to 2016
$622k
Laura and John Arnold FoundationNIA NIH HHS K01 AG041763NIA NIH HHS K01AG041763NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK101828NIDDK NIH HHS K24DK101828NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK096008NIDDK NIH HHS R01DK096008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the United States, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) provides publicly available quality report cards. These reports have historically rated transplant programs using a 3-tier system. In 2016, the SRTR temporarily transitioned to a 5-tier system, which classified more programs as under-performing. As part of a larger survey about transplant quality metrics, we surveyed members of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons and American Society of Transplantation (N = 280 respondents) on transplant center experiences with patient and payer responses to the 5-tier SRTR ratings. Over half of respondents (n = 137, 52.1%) reported ≥1 negative effect of the new 5-tier ranking system, including losing patients, losing insurers, increased concern among patients, and increased concern among referring providers. Few respondents (n = 35, 13.7%) reported any positive effects of the 5-tier ranking system. Lower SRTR-reported scores on the 5-tier scale were associated with increased risk of reporting at least one negative effect in a logistic model (P < 0.01). The change to a more granular rating system provoked an immediate response in the transplant community that may have long-term implications for transplant hospital finances and patient options for transplantation.

Indexed as

Quality of Health CareRegistriesHumansSocieties, MedicalSurgeonsSurveys and QuestionnairesTissue and Organ ProcurementTransplantationTransplant RecipientsTransplantsUnited Statesquality of care/care deliveryScientific Registry for Transplant Recipients

Identifiers

PMID29802802
PMCPMC6219856

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.