Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35706607›Full record

ArticleTransplantation direct2022

MELD-GRAIL and MELD-GRAIL-Na Are Not Superior to MELD or MELD-Na in Predicting Liver Transplant Waiting List Mortality at a Single-center Level.

John D Chetwood, Mark G Wells, Tatiana Tsoutsman, Carlo Pulitano, Michael D Crawford, Ken Liu, Simone I Strasser, Geoffrey W McCaughan, Avik Majumdar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transplantation direct, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

John D ChetwoodAW Morrow Gastroenterology and Liver Centre, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Mark G WellsAustralian National Liver Transplant Unit, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Tatiana TsoutsmanAW Morrow Gastroenterology and Liver Centre, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Carlo PulitanoCentral Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Michael D CrawfordCentral Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Ken LiuAW Morrow Gastroenterology and Liver Centre, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Simone I StrasserAW Morrow Gastroenterology and Liver Centre, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Geoffrey W McCaughanAW Morrow Gastroenterology and Liver Centre, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Avik MajumdarAW Morrow Gastroenterology and Liver Centre, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital · AUUniversity of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Controversy exists regarding the best predictive model of liver transplant waiting list (WL) mortality. Models for end-stage liver disease-glomerular filtration rate assessment in liver disease (MELD-GRAIL) and MELD-GRAIL-Na were recently described to provide better prognostication, particularly in females. We evaluated the performance of these scores compared to MELD and MELD-Na. Methods: Consecutive patients with cirrhosis waitlisted for liver transplant from 1998 to 2017 were examined in this single-center study. The primary outcome was 90-d WL mortality. MELD, MELD-Na, MELD-GRAIL, and MELD-GRAIL-Na at the time of WL registration were compared. Model discrimination was assessed with area under the receiver operating characteristic curves and Harrell's C-index after fitting Cox models. Model calibration was examined with Grønnesby and Borgan's modification of the Hosmer-Lemeshow formula and by comparing predicted/observed outcomes across model strata. Results: The study population comprised 1108 patients with a median age of 53.5 (interquartile range 48-59) y and male predominance (74.9%). All models had excellent areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the primary outcome (MELD 0.89, MELD-Na 0.91, MELD-GRAIL 0.89, MELD-GRAIL-Na 0.89; all comparisons Conclusion: There were no demonstrable differences in discrimination or calibration of GRAIL-based models compared with MELD or MELD-Na in our cohort. This suggests that GRAIL-based models may not have meaningful improvements in discriminatory ability when applied to other settings.

Identifiers

PMID35706607
PMCPMC9191558
OpenAlexW4281679166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.