ArticleClinical transplantation2018
Reliability of deceased-donor procurement kidney biopsy images uploaded in United Network for Organ Sharing.
Article in Clinical transplantation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between Hemoglobin A1c and Renal Arteriolar Sclerosis in Subjects Presenting without any Apparent Kidney Dysfunction.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2024Article
- The Independent Effects of Procurement Biopsy Findings on 10-Year Outcomes of Extended Criteria Donor Kidney Transplants.Kidney international reports · 2022Article
- Assessment of Interobserver Reliability of Nephrologist Examination of Urine Sediment.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Can Behavioral Research Improve Transplant Decision-Making? A Mock Offer Study on the Role of Kidney Procurement Biopsies.Kidney360 · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Prior studies demonstrate poor agreement among pathologists' interpretation of kidney biopsy slides. Reliability of representative images of these slides uploaded to the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) web portal for clinician review has not been studied. We hypothesized high agreement among pathologists' image interpretation, since static images eliminate variation induced by viewing different areas of movable slides. To test our hypothesis, we compared the assessments of UNOS-uploaded images recorded in standardized forms by three pathologists. We selected 100 image sets, each having at least two images from kidneys of deceased donors. Weighted Cohen's kappa was used for inter-rater agreement. Mean (SD) donor age was 50 (13). Acute tubular injury had kappas of 0.12, 0.14, and 0.19; arteriolar hyalinosis 0.16, 0.27, and 0.38; interstitial inflammation 0.30, 0.33, and 0.49; interstitial fibrosis 0.28, 0.32, and 0.67; arterial intimal fibrosis 0.34, 0.42, and 0.59; tubular atrophy 0.35, 0.41, and 0.52; glomeruli thrombi 0.32, 0.53, and 0.85; and global glomerulosclerosis 0.68, 0.70, and 0.77. Pathologists' agreement demonstrated kappas of 0.12 to 0.77. The lower values raise concern about the reliability of using images. Although further research is needed to understand how uploaded images are used clinically, the field may consider higher-quality standards for biopsy photomicrographs.
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.