ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2021
Trends and Outcomes of Cardiac Transplantation in the Lowest Urgency Candidates.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of 2018 allocation system change on heart transplantation outcomes in china: a retrospective analysis.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- The Association Between Preoperative Pectoralis Muscle Quantity and Outcomes After Cardiac Transplantation.Journal of cardiac failure · 2024Article
- Impact of the 2018 UNOS Heart Transplant Policy Changes on Patient Outcomes.JACC. Heart failure · 2023Review
- UNOS policy change benefits high-priority patients without harming those at low priority.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2022Article
- Bias in team decision-making for advanced heart failure therapies: model application.Journal of interprofessional careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background Because of discrepancies between donor supply and recipient demand, the cardiac transplantation process aims to prioritize the most medically urgent patients. It remains unknown how recipients with the lowest medical urgency compare to others in the allocation process. We aimed to examine differences in clinical characteristics, organ allocation patterns, and outcomes between cardiac transplantation candidates with the lowest and highest medical urgency. Methods and Results We performed a retrospective analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Patients listed for cardiac transplantation between January 2011 and May 2020 were stratified according to status at time of transplantation. Baseline recipient and donor characteristics, waitlist survival, and posttransplantation outcomes were compared in the years before and after the 2018 allocation system change. Lower urgency patients in the old system were older (58.5 versus 56 years) and more likely female (54.4% versus 23.8%) compared with the highest urgency patients, and these trends persisted in the new system (
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.