ArticleThe Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation2024
A modular simulation framework for organ allocation.
Article in The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A supply-based scoring approach to account for biological disadvantages in accessing lung transplant.The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe describe and validate a new simulation framework addressing important limitations of the Simulated Allocation Models (SAMs) long used to project population effects of transplant policy changes.
methodsWe developed the Computational Open-source Model for Evaluating Transplantation (COMET), an agent-based model simulating interactions of individual donors and candidates over time to project population outcomes. COMET functionality is organized into interacting modules. Donors and candidates are synthetically generated using data-driven probability models which are adaptable to account for ongoing or hypothetical donor/candidate population trends and evolving disease management. To validate the first implementation of COMET, COMET-Lung, we attempted to reproduce lung transplant outcomes for U.S. adults from 2018-2019 and in the 6 months following adoption of the Composite Allocation Score (CAS) for lung transplant.
resultsSimulated (median [Interquartile Range, IQR]) vs observed outcomes for 2018-2019 were: 0.162 [0.157, 0.167] vs 0.170 waitlist deaths per waitlist year; 1.25 [1.23, 1.28] vs 1.26 transplants per waitlist year; 0.115 [0.112, 0.118] vs 0.113 post-transplant deaths per patient year; 202 [102, 377] vs 165 nautical miles travel distance. The model accurately predicted the observed precipitous decrease in transplants received by type O lung candidates in the six months following CAS implementation.
conclusionsCOMET-Lung closely reproduced most observed outcomes. The use of synthetic populations in the COMET framework paves the way for examining possible transplant policy and clinical practice changes in populations reflecting realistic future states. Its flexible, modular nature can accelerate development of features to address specific research or policy questions across multiple organs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.