ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Liver transplant donor-recipient matching with offline reinforcement learning.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite advances in liver transplantation (LT), deciding when to transplant a patient within the context of high waitlist mortality, organ scarcity, and risk of graft failure, remains an ongoing challenge. Existing approaches focus on the static prediction of successful LT donor-recipient pairs without weighing the competing interests such as the risk of graft failure against the risk of waitlist mortality and how these risks change over time. Instead, we used an offline reinforcement learning (RL) approach to represent the problem as the optimization of the series of decisions to wait, delist, or transplant a candidate at different timepoints. Using waitlist trajectories for LT candidates from the national Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) database, we trained a model resulting in the avoidance of 73% of donor-recipient pairs that led to graft failure or death, preservation of 93% of successful transplants, and potentially suitable donors were found for 47% of those patients that died on the waitlist. Notably, the analysis of decisions and post-transplant survival revealed that our model learned features suggestive of successful donor-recipient pairs. Overall, we demonstrate how RL-based approaches better portray real-world LT donor-recipient matching decisions, illustrating their potential as useful clinical tools.
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.