Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41523154›Full record

ArticleJournal of transplantation2026

Predictive Models for Kidney Offer Acceptance: Challenges and Strategies.

Carlos Martinez, Md Nasir, Meghana Kshirsagar, Cass McCharen, Rae Shean, Juan Lavista Ferres, Rahul Dodhia, William B Weeks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of transplantation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

8 authors.

Carlos MartinezResearch Science, United Network for Organ Sharing, Richmond, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8312-2713
Md NasirAI for Good Lab, Microsoft, Redmond, Washington, USA, microsoft.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3955-0996
Meghana KshirsagarAI for Good Lab, Microsoft, Redmond, Washington, USA, microsoft.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4673-614X
Cass McCharenResearch Science, United Network for Organ Sharing, Richmond, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7074-9024
Rae SheanResearch Science, United Network for Organ Sharing, Richmond, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0229-6920
Juan Lavista FerresAI for Good Lab, Microsoft, Redmond, Washington, USA, microsoft.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9654-3178
Rahul DodhiaAI for Good Lab, Microsoft, Redmond, Washington, USA, microsoft.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3812-3906
William B WeeksAI for Good Lab, Microsoft, Redmond, Washington, USA, microsoft.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9918-1360

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Predicting whether an organ offer will be accepted for transplantation remains challenging for several reasons, including large offer volumes, highly imbalanced observations (more declines than acceptances), and lack of information about the human decision-making process. Offer acceptance models are used for risk-adjusted program evaluations and policy development, but there is a lack of literature on baselines and best practices for predictive applications. We compared a suite of machine learning models, feature sets, and sampling procedures to identify performance impacts when training offer acceptance prediction models. Methods: We evaluated several kidney offer acceptance models from logistic regression to gradient boosted trees that were trained on donor and candidate characteristics. We then selected the best-performing model and augmented training data with additional features (e.g., distance from the closest airport to the transplant hospital) or additional sampling procedures (e.g., undersampling). Results: Compared to the baseline logistic regression model (average precision: 0.0645), the XGBoost model offered the best performance improvement over the baseline (average precision: 0.0907). Including transportation-related features in the model further improved model performance (average precision: 0.0940); however, we did not observe substantial model performance differences based on the sampling procedure used. Conclusions: Leveraging advanced machine learning models and incorporating nonclinical datapoints (like transportation distances) can improve transplant organ offer acceptance prediction models. However, we observed steep tradeoffs between precision and recall as captured in the low average precision scores despite deceptively high AUROCs (baseline AUROC 0.832). Our findings suggest that even the best-performing models would not provide clear, equitable benefits over existing allocation policies. More research is needed before these models are practical for clinical implementation.

Identifiers

PMID41523154
PMCPMC12784377

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.