Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36695687›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons2023

A comparison of deprivation indices and application to transplant populations.

Christine Park, Tyler Schappe, Sarah Peskoe, Dinushika Mohottige, Norine W Chan, Nrupen A Bhavsar, L Ebony Boulware, Jane Pendergast, Allan D Kirk, Lisa M McElroy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The association of place-based disadvantage and access to deceased donor heart transplantation.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2026
    Article
  7. Geographic variation in utilization of deceased donor livers in the United States in the era of advanced perfusion.Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. A Comparison of Neighborhood Socioeconomic Deprivation Measures and the Association with Survival among Black and White Women with Endometrial Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Neighborhood-level social determinants of health measures independently predict receipt of living donor liver transplantation in the United States.Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society · 2024
    Article
  20. 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.

Christine ParkDivision of Abdominal Transplant, Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Tyler SchappeDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Sarah PeskoeDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Dinushika MohottigeDivision of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Duke University, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Norine W ChanDivision of Abdominal Transplant, Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Nrupen A BhavsarDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA; Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Duke University, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
L Ebony BoulwareDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Duke University, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Jane PendergastDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Allan D KirkDivision of Abdominal Transplant, Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Lisa M McElroyDivision of Abdominal Transplant, Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: lisa.mcelroy@duke.edu.

Funding

Research Project 3U54MD012530 · NIMHD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI JOHNSON, KIMBERLY S. · 2017 to 2022
$8.8M
Increasing Access to Transplant through Improved Clinical Decision MakingK08MD017632 · NIMHD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Lisa M McElroy · 2022 to 2026
$551k
NIMHD NIH HHS K08 MD017632NIMHD NIH HHS U54 MD012530
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The choice of deprivation index can influence conclusions drawn regarding the extent of deprivation within a community and the identification of the most deprived communities in the United States. This study aimed to determine the degree of correlation among deprivation indices commonly used to characterize transplant populations. We used a retrospective cohort consisting of adults listed for liver or kidney transplants between 2008 and 2018 to compare 4 deprivation indices: neighborhood deprivation index, social deprivation index (SDI), area deprivation index, and social vulnerability index. Pairwise correlation between deprivation indices by transplant referral regions was measured using Spearman correlations of population-weighted medians and upper quartiles. In total, 52 individual variables were used among the 4 deprivation indices with 25% overlap. For both organs, the correlation between the population-weighted 75th percentile of the deprivation indices by transplant referral region was highest between SDI and social vulnerability index (liver and kidney, 0.93) and lowest between area deprivation index and SDI (liver, 0.19 and kidney, 0.15). The choice of deprivation index affects the applicability of research findings across studies examining the relationship between social risk and clinical outcomes. Appropriate application of these measures to transplant populations requires careful index selection based on the intended use and included variable relevance.

Indexed as

Kidney TransplantationAdultHumansResidence CharacteristicsRetrospective StudiesUnited Statesclinical research/practicecommunity assessmentdisparitiesdisparitiesqualitative researchhealth equitykidney transplantation/nephrologyliver transplantation/hepatologysocial deprivationtransplant

Identifiers

PMID36695687
PMCPMC10226151

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.