Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38027086›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2023

Is Non-Adherence Associated with Adverse Outcomes in Kidney Transplant Recipients? The Role of Non-Adherence as a Risk and Predictor Factor for Graft Loss and Death.

Manuel Torres-Gutiérrez, Nicolás Lozano-Suárez, Viviana A Burgos-Camacho, Jessica Caamaño-Jaraba, Julia Andrea Gómez-Montero, Andrea García-López, Fernando Girón-Luque

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

7 authors.

Manuel Torres-GutiérrezDepartment of Mental Health, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Nicolás Lozano-SuárezDepartment of Transplant Research, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0003-2851-5105
Viviana A Burgos-CamachoDepartment of Mental Health, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Jessica Caamaño-JarabaDepartment of Mental Health, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Julia Andrea Gómez-MonteroDepartment of Transplant Research, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia.
Andrea García-LópezDepartment of Transplant Research, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-3940-1413
Fernando Girón-LuqueDepartment of Transplant Research, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Non-adherence in kidney transplants is diversely defined. Immunosuppression non-adherence (INA) is the most used definition and has been associated with graft loss and acute rejection. But INA assesses only one fraction of adherence. Therefore, we analyzed the association of a holistic non-adherence definition with transplant outcomes and compared its prediction performance with other definitions. Methods: We retrospectively included 739 kidney recipients between 2019 and 2021. We evaluated holistic non-adherence (HNA), suboptimal-immunosuppressor levels (SIL), appointment non-adherence (ANA), procedure non-adherence (PNA) and INA. The main outcomes were graft loss, graft rejection, and mortality. A backward logistic regression was performed estimating adjusted and un-adjusted odds ratio (OR) for each outcome. Finally, we compared the non-adherence definitions' prediction for the main outcomes using the area under the curve. Results: HNA was present in 28.7% of patients. Non-adherent patients had an adjusted OR of 2.66 (1.37-5.15) for mortality, 6.44 for graft loss (2.71-16.6), and 2.28 (1.15-4.47) for graft rejection. INA and PNA presented a moderate discrimination for graft loss and HNA and ANA mild-to-moderate discrimination for graft loss and death. Conclusion: Holistic non-adherence was associated with worst outcomes in kidney recipients and had a significant prediction performance for graft loss and mortality.

Indexed as

graft survivalkidney transplantationmortalitypatient adherencepatient outcome assessment

Identifiers

PMID38027086
PMCPMC10648956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.