ArticleScientific reports2025
Personalized prediction model generated with machine learning for kidney function one year after living kidney donation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Living kidney donors typically experience approximately a 30% reduction in kidney function after donation, although the degree of reduction varies among individuals. This study aimed to develop a machine learning (ML) model to predict serum creatinine (Cre) levels at one year post-donation using preoperative clinical data, including kidney-, fat-, and muscle-volumetry values from computed tomography. A total of 204 living kidney donors were included. Symbolic regression via genetic programming was employed to create an ML-based Cre prediction model using preoperative clinical variables. Validation was conducted using a 7:3 training-to-test data split. The ML model demonstrated a median absolute error of 0.079 mg/dL for predicting Cre. In the validation cohort, it outperformed conventional methods (which assume post-donation eGFR to be 70% of the preoperative value) with higher R
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.