ArticleKidney international reports2026
Characterizing Within-Center Placement of Out-of-Sequence Deceased-Donor Kidney Transplants.
Article in Kidney international reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Deceased-donor kidney (DDK) allocation is intended to follow a ranked match-run of potential recipients. Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) can bypass this sequence and allocate kidneys "out-of-sequence" (OOS) to transplant centers, which then decide which of their candidates receives the kidney. We examine OOS placement practices within individual transplant centers. Methods: We included the 5 US transplant centers that performed the most OOS kidney transplants from 2021 to 2023, representing 1598 OOS transplants. Candidates were classified as "skipped" if their transplant center declined an OOS kidney on their behalf and allocated the kidney to a patient lower on the center's waitlist. "Never-skipped" candidates received OOS kidney transplants without having been skipped. For each OOS transplant, we assessed how often the top-ranked candidate was skipped. We used mixed effects models to determine factors associated with being skipped. Results: Among included centers, the top candidate was skipped in 98% of OOS placements. The median OOS recipient within-center match-run rank was 23. Skipped candidates were younger (56 vs. 63 years) and had more dialysis exposure than never-skipped patients. Fewer than 50% of skipped candidates received a DDK transplant later in the study period (through 2023), and those who did received kidneys with a median Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) 13 points higher than their lowest-KDPI skipped offer. Conclusion: Younger candidates and those with longer dialysis durations were more likely to be skipped. A minority of skipped patients later received a lower KDPI (lower risk of graft failure) kidney. More transparency in OOS placement decisions is needed.
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.