Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41239278›Full record

SynthesisBMC nephrology2025

Artificial intelligence-driven kidney organ allocation: systematic review of clinical outcome prediction, ethical frameworks, and decision-making algorithms.

Faezeh Firuzpour, Abazar Akbarzadeh Pasha, Farshid Oliaei, Khatereh Nasirimehr, Mohammadreza Khosravi, Ghasem Rostami, Hamid Reza Saeidnia

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Beyond generic principles: a framework for the ethical analysis of artificial intelligence in organ transplantation.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026
    Article
  5. Shaping the Future of AI in Organ Transplantation: Position Paper of the European Society for Organ Transplantation.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026
    Article
  6. 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.

Faezeh FiruzpourResearch Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran.
Abazar Akbarzadeh PashaClinical Research Development Unit of Shahid Beheshti Hospital, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran.
Farshid OliaeiClinical Research Development Unit of Shahid Beheshti Hospital, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran.
Khatereh NasirimehrDepartment of Internal Medicine, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
Mohammadreza KhosraviResearch Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran.
Ghasem RostamiDepartment of Urology, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran. drghasemrostami.edu@gmail.com.
Hamid Reza SaeidniaDepartment of Knowledge and Information Science, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Kidney transplantation remains the optimal treatment for end-stage renal disease, yet persistent organ shortages and inequitable allocation necessitate innovative solutions. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have emerged as promising tools for improving clinical outcomes and optimizing donor-recipient matching. However, their integration into clinical practice remains limited, and significant challenges regarding validation and ethical implementation persist. This systematic review synthesizes current research on AI-driven kidney allocation, focusing on predictive modeling, operational algorithms, and ethical considerations. We conducted a comprehensive literature search with no restrictions on publication year or country across biomedical databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase), AI repositories (arXiv, IEEE Xplore), and clinical trial registries. Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing retrospective cohort analyses, simulation studies, and algorithmic frameworks. Data were extracted on model performance, clinical outcomes, and fairness metrics, with quality assessed via modified QUADAS-2 and PROBAST tools. Findings revealed that AI/ML models-particularly deep learning and ensemble methods-outperform traditional risk scores (e.g., KDRI, EPTS) in predicting graft survival (C-index: 0.65-0.72) and waitlist outcomes. However, only a minority of studies integrated these predictions into actionable allocation policies, with most limited to simulation environments. Ethical frameworks were inconsistently applied; while fairness and transparency were frequently cited, few studies embedded them algorithmically. Key gaps included real-world validation, prospective bias audits, and standardized reporting of subgroup impacts. AI holds immense potential to enhance kidney allocation but requires rigorous clinical translation and ethical governance. Future research must prioritize multidisciplinary collaboration to bridge the divide between predictive accuracy and equitable implementation.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceDecision MakingKidney Failure, ChronicKidney TransplantationTissue and Organ ProcurementHumansMachine LearningArtificial intelligenceEthicsKidney transplantationMachine learningOrgan allocation

Identifiers

PMID41239278
PMCPMC12619412

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.