ArticleJAMA surgery2022
Proposing a Sex-Adjusted Sodium-Adjusted MELD Score for Liver Transplant Allocation.
Article in JAMA surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inconsistent values and algorithmic fairness: a review of organ allocation priority systems in the United States.BMC medical ethics · 2024Pooled it
- Addressing gender-based disparities in liver transplantation: A global analysis of surgical access and donor organ allocation.World journal of transplantation · 2026Article
- Review
- Sex-Specific Genetic Architecture and Comorbidities of Alcohol Use Behaviors.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Improved Discrimination and Predictive Ability of Novel Prognostic Scores for Long-term Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with Cirrhosis.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2025Article
- Predicting futile outcomes following deceased donor liver transplantation in non-HCC patients with MELD-Na score above 30: a retrospective international multicenter cohort study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Article
- Review
- The Development and Appraisal of MELD 3.0 in Liver Diseases: Good Things Never Come Easy.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2025Review
- Sex differences in the SOFA score of ICU patients with sepsis or septic shock: a nationwide analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Article
- The BAR Score Predicts and Stratifies Outcomes Following Liver Retransplantation: Insights From a Retrospective Cohort Study.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2024Article
- The Effect of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease 3.0 on Disparities between Patients with and without Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Korea.Yonsei medical journal · 2023Article
- Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in women - Current knowledge and emerging concepts.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2023Review
- Revising the MELD Score to Address Sex-Bias in Liver Transplant Prioritization for a German Cohort.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Liver allocation is determined by the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), a scoring system based on 4 laboratory measurements. During the MELD era, sex disparities in liver transplant have increased and there are no modifications to MELD based on sex. Objective: To use laboratory values stored in electronic health records to describe population-level sex differences in all MELD laboratory values (in healthy individuals and patients with liver disease) and propose a sex adjustment. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from March 2019 to April 2020 to evaluate sex differences in laboratory values in liver transplant patients, patients with liver disease who did not undergo transplant, and healthy controls. Primary analyses were conducted in Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC)'s deidentified electronic health record system. Replication analyses were conducted in the All of Us Research Program. Simulations of a sex-adjusted sodium-adjusted MELD (MELDNa) score were completed using liver transplant waiting list data from the liver simulated allocation modeling system. Patients who regularly used VUMC with measurements for any MELDNa component laboratory were included in the analyses. Analysis took place from November 2019 to March 2021. Exposures: Electronic health record-reported sex. Main Outcomes and Measure: Creatinine, bilirubin, international normalized ratio, and sodium levels. Results: The VUMC sample was composed of 623 931 individuals (359 976 [57.7%] female) with a median (IQR) age of 44 (23-61) years. All component MELDNa laboratory values and calculated MELDNa scores yielded significant sex differences within VUMC (mean [SD] creatinine: male, 0.99 [0.39] mg/dL; female, 0.79 [0.30] mg/dL; P < .001; bilirubin: male, 0.76 [0.83] mg/dL; female, 0.58 [0.64] mg/dL; P < .001; international normalized ratio of prothrombin rate: male, 1.24 [0.42]; female, 1.20 [0.40]; P < .001; sodium: male, 139.00 [2.36] mEq/L; female, 139.03 [2.28] mEq/L; P < .001), resulting in MELDNa scoring that disadvantaged female individuals. This pattern persisted when the sample was divided into healthy controls, individuals with liver disease who did not undergo transplant, and patients who did undergo liver transplant. Female transplant patients had a greater number of decompensation traits (mean [SD]: male, 1.34 [1.11]; female, 1.60 [1.09]; P = .005), despite having lower MELDNa scores (mean [SD]: male, 21.72 [6.11]; female, 20.21 [6.15]; P = .005), indicating MELDNa scores are not accurately representing disease severity in female individuals. In simulations, the sex-adjusted MELDNa score modestly increased female transplant rate and decreased overall death. Conclusions and Relevance: These results demonstrate pervasive sex differences in all laboratory values used in MELDNa scoring and highlight the need and utility of a sex-adjustment to the MELDNa protocol.
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.