Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32996170›Full record

ArticleTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation2020

Machine learning to predict transplant outcomes: helpful or hype? A national cohort study.

Sunjae Bae, Allan B Massie, Brian S Caffo, Kyle R Jackson, Dorry L Segev

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Assessing Deceased-Donor Kidneys Through Posttransplant Survival Prediction Algorithms.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Shaping the Future of AI in Organ Transplantation: Position Paper of the European Society for Organ Transplantation.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors.

Sunjae BaeDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0098-8816
Allan B MassieDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Brian S CaffoDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Kyle R JacksonDepartment of Surgery, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8135-5377
Dorry L SegevDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

Patient Oriented Research in Solid Organ TransplantationK24AI144954 · NIAID · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI SEGEV, DORRY L. · 2020 to 2024
$956k
Patient Oriented Research in Kidney Disease and Transplant SurgeryK24DK101828 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SEGEV, DORRY L. · 2014 to 2018
$922k
Determinants of chronic kidney disease in African-American live kidney donorsK01DK101677 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI MASSIE, ALLAN B · 2015 to 2019
$789k
Differential Survival Benefit of Incompatible Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: Modeling Outcomes for Different Patient PhenotypesF32DK113719 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI JACKSON, KYLE R · 2017 to 2019
$238k
NIAID NIH HHS K24 AI144954NIDDK NIH HHS F32 DK113719NIDDK NIH HHS F32DK113719NIDDK NIH HHS K01 DK101677NIDDK NIH HHS K01DK101677NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK101828NIDDK NIH HHS K24DK101828
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An increasing number of studies claim machine learning (ML) predicts transplant outcomes more accurately. However, these claims were possibly confounded by other factors, namely, supplying new variables to ML models. To better understand the prospects of ML in transplantation, we compared ML to conventional regression in a "common" analytic task: predicting kidney transplant outcomes using national registry data. We studied 133 431 adult deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients between 2005 and 2017. Transplant centers were randomly divided into 70% training set (190 centers/97 787 recipients) and 30% validation set (82 centers/35 644 recipients). Using the training set, we performed regression and ML procedures [gradient boosting (GB) and random forests (RF)] to predict delayed graft function, one-year acute rejection, death-censored graft failure C, all-cause graft failure, and death. Their performances were compared on the validation set using -statistics. In predicting rejection, regression (C =

Indexed as

Graft RejectionKidney TransplantationAdultCohort StudiesGraft SurvivalHumansMachine LearningTissue DonorsTreatment Outcomekidney transplantationmachine learningpredictionregression

Identifiers

PMID32996170
PMCPMC8269970

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.