Sex Inequality in Kidney Transplantation Rates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Men in the United States undergoing renal replacement therapy are more likely than women to receive a kidney transplant. However, the ability to pay may, in part, be responsible for this finding. OBJECTIVE: To compare adult male and female transplantation rates in a setting in which equal access to medical treatment is assumed. METHODS: Using data from the Canadian Organ Replacement Register, the rate of first transplantations was computed for the 20, 131 men and the 13,458 women aged 20 years or older who initiated renal replacement therapy between January 1, 1981, and December 31, 1996. Poisson regression analysis was used to estimate the male-female transplantation rate ratio, adjusting for age, race, province, calendar period, underlying disease leading to renal failure, and dialytic modality. Actuarial survival methods were used to compare transplantation probability for covariable-matched cohorts of men and women. RESULTS: Men experienced 20% greater covariable-adjusted kidney transplantation rates relative to women (rate ratio, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.27). The sex disparity was stronger for cadaveric transplants (rate ratio, 1.23) compared with those from living donors (rate ratio, 1.10). The 5-year probability of receiving a transplant was 47% for men and 39% for women within covariable-matched cohorts (P<.001). The sex disparity in transplantation rates increased with increasing age. The sex effect was weaker among whites and Oriental persons (Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, Filipino, Malaysian, Indonesian, and Korean) and stronger among blacks, Asian Indians (Indian, Pakistani, and Sri Lankan), and North American Indians (aboriginal). CONCLUSION: Since survival probability and quality of life are superior for patients who undergo transplantation relative to those who undergo dialysis, an increased effort should be made to distribute kidneys available for transplantation more equitably by sex among patients undergoing renal replacement therapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".