ArticleBMC nephrology2022
Interaction between socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity for likelihood of receiving living-donor kidney transplantation.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of socio-economic disparities on kidney transplant outcomes: insights from a monocentric Italian study.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of outcomes after living and deceased donor kidney transplantation: UK national cohort study.The British journal of surgery · 2025Article
- The ASK trial: a randomised controlled feasibility trial and process evaluation of a complex multicomponent intervention to improve AccesS to living-donor Kidney transplantation.Wellcome open research · 2024Article
- Testing the Differential Access Hypothesis That Black Kidney Transplant Candidates Perceive Social Network Access to Fewer Potential Living Donors Than White Candidates.Progress in transplantation (Aliso Viejo, Calif.) · 2023Article
- Taking a "Care Pathway/Whole Systems" Approach to Equality Diversity Inclusion (EDI) in Organ Donation and Transplantation in Relation to the Needs of "Ethnic/Racial/Migrant" Minority Communities: A Statement and a Call for Action.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023Review
- Inequities in Organ Donation and Transplantation Among Immigrant Populations in Italy: A Narrative Review of Evidence, Gaps in Research and Potential Areas for Intervention.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023Review
- Decisional Needs of People From Minority Ethnic Groups Around Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A UK Healthcare Professionals' Perspective.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe interplay between ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation for living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) opportunities is unclear.
methodsData for 2040 consecutive kidney-alone transplant recipients receiving an allograft between 1st January 2007 and 30th June 2020 at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. The associations between the proportions of transplants that were LDKT (versus deceased donation) and both ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation were assessed, with the latter quantified by the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) quintile.
resultsThe cohort comprised recipients of White (64.7%), South Asian (21.7%), Black (7.0%) and other (6.6%) ethnic groups. Recipients tended to be from socioeconomically deprived areas, with the most deprived quintile being the most frequently observed (quintile 1: 38.6% of patients); non-White recipients were significantly more likely to live in socioeconomically deprived areas (p < 0.001). Overall, 36.5% of transplants were LDKT, with this proportion declining progressively with socioeconomic deprivation, from 50.4 to 27.6% in the least versus most deprived IMD quintile (p < 0.001). A significant difference across recipient ethnicities was also observed, with the proportion of LDKTs ranging from 43.2% in White recipients to 17.8% in Black recipients (p < 0.001). Both socioeconomic deprivation (p < 0.001) and ethnicity (p = 0.005) remained significant predictors of LDKT on multivariable analysis, with a significant interaction between these factors also being observed (p < 0.001). Further assessment of this interaction effect found that, whilst there was a marked difference in the proportions of transplants that were LDKT between White versus non-White recipients in the most socioeconomically deprived groups (39.5% versus 19.3%), no such difference was seen in the least deprived recipients (48.5% versus 51.9%).
conclusionsWhilst both socioeconomic deprivation and non-White ethnicity are independent predictors for lower proportions of LDKTs, the significant interaction between the two factors should be appreciated.
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.