Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36684997›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

A machine-learning approach to estimating public intentions to become a living kidney donor in England: Evidence from repeated cross-sectional survey data.

Paul Boadu, Leah McLaughlin, Mustafa Al-Haboubi, Jennifer Bostock, Jane Noyes, Stephen O'Neill, Nicholas Mays

Open access · goldAbstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Paul BoaduPolicy Innovation and Evaluation Research Unit, Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Leah McLaughlinSchool of Medical and Health Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, United Kingdom.
Mustafa Al-HaboubiPolicy Innovation and Evaluation Research Unit, Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Jennifer BostockPolicy Innovation and Evaluation Research Unit, Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Jane NoyesSchool of Medical and Health Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, United Kingdom.
Stephen O'NeillPolicy Innovation and Evaluation Research Unit, Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Nicholas MaysPolicy Innovation and Evaluation Research Unit, Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBBangor University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Living kidney organ donors offer a cost-effective alternative to deceased organ donation. They enable patients with life-threatening conditions to receive grafts that would otherwise not be available, thereby creating space for other patients waiting for organs and contributing to reducing overall waiting times for organs. There is an emerging consensus that an increase in living donation could contribute even more than deceased donation to reducing inequalities in organ donation between different population sub-groups in England. Increasing living donation is thus a priority for National Health Service Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) in the United Kingdom. Methods: Using the random forest model, a machine learning (ML) approach, this study analyzed eight waves of repeated cross-sectional survey data collected from 2017 to 2021 ( Results: Overall, around 58.8% of the population would consider donating their kidney to a family member (50.5%), a friend (28%) or an unknown person (13.2%). The ML algorithm identified important factors that influence intentions to become a living kidney donor. They include, in reducing order of importance, support for organ donation, awareness of organ donation publicity campaigns, gender, age, occupation, religion, number of children in the household, and ethnic origin. Support for organ donation, awareness of public campaigns, and being younger were all positively associated with predicted propensity for living donation. The variable importance scores show that ethnic origin and religion were less important than the other variables in predicting living donor intention. Conclusion: Factors influencing intentions to become a living donor are complex and highly individual in nature. Machine learning methods that allow for complex interactions between characteristics can be helpful in explaining these decisions. This work has identified important factors and subgroups that have higher propensity for living donation. Interventions should target both potential live donors and recipients. Research is needed to explore the extent to which these preferences are malleable to better understand what works and in which contexts to increase live organ donation.

Indexed as

Kidney TransplantationLiving DonorsChildCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandHumansIntentionState Medicinecost-effectivenesskidney donationliving donororgan donationpublic intentionspublic perceptionspublic support

Identifiers

PMID36684997
PMCPMC9846224
OpenAlexW4313584291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.