SynthesisTransplantation2020
Executive Functioning in Pediatric Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Meta-analytic Review.
Synthesis in Transplantation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Bridging the Gap: A Review of Pediatric to Adult Transition of Care in Liver Transplantation.Pediatric transplantation · 2025Review
- Neuropsychological and biopsychosocial evolution, therapeutic adherence and unmet care needs during paediatric transplantation: study protocol of a mixed-methods design (observational cohort study and focus groups) - the TransplantKIDS mental health project.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExamining executive functioning (EF) posttransplant has become increasingly prevalent, as EF deficits are associated with poor disease-related outcomes and psychosocial functioning. The purpose of the current meta-analysis was to compare overall and domain-specific EF between healthy youth and those with a kidney, heart, or liver transplant, and identify moderating variables related to EF differences between these 2 groups.
methodsA literature search of PsycINFO, Pubmed, and Medline was conducted for eligible articles published until January 2019. Twenty studies met eligibility criteria and were included in the present meta-analysis.
resultsResults from the random-effects model indicated a significant standardized mean difference in overall EF skills with transplant recipients demonstrating worse EF (g = 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.50) than healthy youth. Specifically, transplanted youth had worse working memory (g = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.01-0.66), processing speed (g = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.19-0.62), attentional control (g = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.33-0.73), and metacognitive skills (g = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.18-0.54). Assessment type and time since transplantation were not significant moderators.
conclusionsPediatric solid organ transplant recipients demonstrate worse overall EF skills and deficits in working memory, processing speed, attentional control, and metacognitive skills. Many children who have undergone solid organ transplantation will require additional support in medical and academic settings because of deficits in various EF domains.
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.