Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36622257›Full record

ArticleClinical transplantation2023

Factors enabling transplant program participation in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective: A national survey.

Krista L Lentine, Mary Amanda Dew, Huiling Xiao, Addie Wisniewski, Macey L Levan, Fawaz Al Ammary, Asif Sharfuddin, David A Axelrod, Amy D Waterman, Bertram Kasiske

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical transplantation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Krista L LentineSaint Louis University Transplant Center, SSM-Saint Louis University Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9423-4849
Mary Amanda DewUniversity of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4666-1870
Huiling XiaoSaint Louis University Transplant Center, SSM-Saint Louis University Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Addie WisniewskiSaint Louis University Transplant Center, SSM-Saint Louis University Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Macey L LevanNew York University, New York, New York, USA.
Fawaz Al AmmaryUniversity of Irvine, Irvine, California, USA.
Asif SharfuddinIndiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
David A AxelrodUniversity of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5684-0613
Amy D WatermanHouston Methodist Transplant Institute, Houston, Texas, USA.
Bertram KasiskeHennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Funding

Living Donor Extended Time Outcomes (LETO) StudyR01DK120551 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI HSU, CHI-YUAN, LENTINE, KRISTA L · 2019 to 2023
$3.9M
Telemedicine for Evaluation and Counseling of Living Kidney Donor CandidatesK23DK129820 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI AL AMMARY, FAWAZ · 2021 to 2025
$985k
Development of a Robust Strategy for Living Kidney Donor Follow-up and EngagementR03DK132222 · NIDDK · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI LEVAN, MACEY LEIGH · 2022 to 2023
$254k
NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK129820NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK120551NIDDK NIH HHS R03 DK132222
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective (LDC), the first effort to create a lifetime registry for living donor candidates in the United States, requires transplant programs to register donor candidates while the SRTR conducts follow-up.

methodsTo better understand facilitators and barriers to program participation, we conducted a brief electronic survey of U.S. transplant program staff from October 26, 2021 to December 17, 2021.

resultsWe received 132 responses, with at least one response from 87 living donor programs (46 kidney programs, 33 kidney and liver programs, and eight liver programs alone). We found 86% of program representatives strongly agreed or agreed that funding adequate to cover the cost of data collection would facilitate LDC participation, 92% agreed or strongly agreed with importance of electronic data submission options, and 74% reported that elimination of requirements to submit duplicative pre-operative information to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) would be helpful. Other potentially enabling factors include reduction in duration of OPTN postdonation follow-up requirements, ease-of-use, protection from data use for regulation, adequate data security, and equity in data access.

conclusionThis survey identifies potential targets to strengthen participation in the effort to create a national living donor registry in the United States. Collaboration and investment to overcome barriers to LDC participation among transplant programs are vital to generate long-term data on living donation for donor candidates, donors, and patients in need of transplant.

Indexed as

Organ TransplantationTissue and Organ ProcurementHumansLiving DonorsRegistriesSurveys and QuestionnairesTransplant RecipientsUnited Statesfollow-up careliving kidney donorsregistrySRTRsurvey

Identifiers

PMID36622257
PMCPMC10423496

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.