ArticleJAMA network open2025
Residential Neighborhood Disadvantage and Access to Kidney Transplantation.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dementia in Advanced Kidney Disease by Race and Ethnicity and Neighborhood Factors.Kidney international reports · 2026Article
- Neighborhood Disadvantage and Dementia Risk Among Older Patients With Kidney Failure: Differences by Race/Ethnicity and Urbanicity.Kidney medicine · 2026Article
- Geography and Access to Kidney Transplant-Are We Measuring What Matters?JAMA network open · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Residence in a disadvantaged neighborhood is a key driver of racial and ethnic disparities in the diagnosis and management of chronic diseases; however, its impact on disparities in access to waitlisting and kidney transplantation (KT) is unclear. Objective: To examine the association between neighborhood disadvantage and access to waitlisting and KT. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study (January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2021) used a US national registry to assess adults (aged ≥18 years) with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and adult KT candidates. Statistical analysis was performed in March 2025. Exposure: Residential neighborhood disadvantage score (built environment disadvantage, criminal injustice, education disadvantage, unemployment, housing instability, poverty, social fragmentation, transportation barrier, and wealth inequality) ascertained by American Community Survey and other public data sources. Main Outcomes and Measures: The adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) of waitlisting and KT (any KT, live-donor KT [LDKT], and preemptive KT) were assessed across tertiles of the neighborhood disadvantage score using cause-specific hazard models. Interaction terms were used to quantify these aforementioned associations by race and ethnicity. Results: The study included 501 444 adults with ESKD initiating dialysis (mean [SD] age, 63.9 [14.6] years; 293 937 [58.6%] male; 25 790 [5.1%] Asian [Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander], 133 923 [26.7%] Black, 66 323 [13.2%] Hispanic, and 275 408 [54.9%] White) and 95 068 KT candidates on the waitlist (mean [SD] age, 53.7 [13.0] years; 60 328 [63.5%] male; 6956 [7.3%] Asian, 25 215 [26.5%] Black, 15 685 [16.5%] Hispanic, and 47 212 [49.7%] White). A total of 173 880 adults with ESKD (34.7%) and 26 718 KT candidates (28.1%) resided in high-disadvantage neighborhoods. After adjustment, adults residing in high-disadvantage neighborhoods were less likely to be waitlisted (AHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.69-0.72) compared with those in low-disadvantage neighborhoods. Specifically, Asian (AHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.95), Black (AHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.66-0.70), Hispanic (AHR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.86-0.92), and White (AHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.66-0.71) adults in high-disadvantage neighborhoods were less likely to be waitlisted compared with White adults in low-disadvantage neighborhoods. Overall, candidates residing in high-disadvantage neighborhoods were less likely to receive any KT (AHR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.87-0.92), LDKT (AHR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.62-0.69), and preemptive KT (AHR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.58-0.67). Notably, Black candidates residing in high-disadvantage neighborhoods were less likely to receive KT (AHR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.58-0.62), LDKT (AHR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.21-0.25), and preemptive KT (AHR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.20-0.25) compared with White candidates in low-disadvantage neighborhoods. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of adults with ESKD and KT candidates, residence in high-disadvantage neighborhoods was associated with reduced access to waitlisting and KT; it also was associated with persistent racial and ethnic disparities in LDKT and preemptive KT. These results suggest that to support equitable access, clinicians and transplant programs should work with social workers and community advocates to implement initiatives (eg, outreach and financial support) that address structural barriers and direct resources to affected neighborhoods.
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.