ArticleTransplantation direct2021
Karnofsky Performance Score-Failure to Thrive as a Frailty Proxy?
Article in Transplantation direct, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Critical appraisal of patient-reported and clinician-reported outcome measures assessing functional outcomes in lower extremity bone sarcoma patients-a COSMIN-based systematic review.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Center Differences in PreTransplant Functional Status and Its Association With Survival After Heart Transplantation.Clinical transplantation · 2026Article
- Augmenting Performance Status: A Preliminary Study of Objective Kinematic Assessment Using Motion Capture.Oncology and therapy · 2026Article
- Comparison of Multiple Frailty Scoring Metrics in Renal Transplant Candidates: A Large Single-center Cohort Study.Transplantation direct · 2026Article
- HCT Frailty Scale (HCT-FS) for assessing frailty in adult candidates for allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation: an international prospective, observational cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Donor-recipient age mismatch and outcomes in liver transplantation: A scientific registry of transplant recipients database analysis.World journal of transplantation · 2025Article
- Reduced Functional Status among Kidney Transplant Recipients over Time and Associated Risks Post-Transplant.Clinical transplantation · 2025Article
- Use of frailty assessment instruments in nephrology populations: a scoping review.BMC geriatrics · 2023Article
- Liver transplantation in the patient with physical frailty.Journal of hepatology · 2023Review
- Chemotherapy with a TP Regimen in Combination with Stereotactic Radiotherapy Could Significantly Optimize the Clinical Efficacy of NSCLC Treatment.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Among patients listed for kidney transplantation, the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) Scale has been used as a proxy for frailty and proposed as a predictor of long-term posttransplant outcomes. The KPS is required by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network for all transplants; however, the interrater reliability of KPS reporting in kidney transplant candidates has not been well investigated, and there is concern regarding limitations of using KPS that may influence transplant eligibility.
methodsWe performed an observational study using existing Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from 2006 to 2020 to examine the variability, reliability, and trends in the KPS among patients on the kidney transplant waitlist.
resultsOur analysis included 8197 kidney transplant candidates with >1 KPS in a 3-mo period. We observed 2-7 scores per patient with an average score of 78.9 (SD = 12, 95% confidence interval, 78.8-79.1). We found substantial variability in KPS reporting, in which 27% of the patients had scores that varied widely with 20-80 points in difference. Interrater reliability in the 10-point scale was poor (30%). When using a condensed 4-category scale (disabled, requires assistance, capable of self-care, normal activity), 38% of patients experienced at least a 1-category shift in their score.
conclusionsThe lack of reliability in KPS reporting raises concerns when applying the KPS as a proxy for frailty and a metric to be considered when evaluating candidacy for kidney transplantation.
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.