Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34603690›Full record

ArticleClinical kidney journal2021

Time to press the reset button-can we use the COVID-19 pandemic to rethink the process of transplant assessment?

Mukesh Kumar, David van Dellen, Holly Loughton, Alexander Woywodt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. The time is now:Clinical kidney journal · 2024
    Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mukesh KumarDepartment of Nephrology, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK.
David van DellenManchester Centre for Transplantation, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Holly LoughtonTransplant patient, Manchester, UK.
Alexander WoywodtDepartment of Nephrology, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3825-6955
Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coronavirus disease 2019 has taken a severe toll on the transplant community, with significant morbidity and mortality not just among transplant patients and those on the waiting list, but also among colleagues. It is therefore not surprising that clinicians in this field have viewed the events of the last 18 months as predominantly negative. As the pandemic is gradually ebbing away, we argue that this is also a unique opportunity to rethink transplant assessment. First, we have witnessed a step-change in the use of technology and virtual assessments. Another effect of the pandemic is that we have had to make do with what was available-which has often worked surprisingly well. Finally, we have learned to think the unthinkable: maybe things do not have to continue the way they have always been. As we emerge on the other side of the pandemic, we should rethink which parts of the transplant assessment process are necessary and evidence-based. We emphasize the need to involve patients in the redesign of pathways and we argue that the assessment process could be made more transparent to patients. We describe a possible roadmap towards transplant assessment pathways that are truly fit for the 21st century.

Indexed as

information technologypatient perspectivetransplant assessment

Identifiers

PMID34603690
PMCPMC8344542
OpenAlexW3182556389

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.