A Description of the Costs of Living and Standard Criteria Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kidney transplantation improves quality of life and survival and is associated with lower health care costs compared with dialysis. We described and compared the costs of living and standard criteria for deceased donor kidney transplantation. Patients included adult recipients of a first kidney-only transplant between April 1, 1998, and March 31, 2006, as well as their donor information. All costs (outpatient care, diagnostic imaging, inpatient care, physician claims, laboratory tests and transplant medications) for 2 years after transplant for recipients and transplant-related costs prior to transplant (donor workup and management) were included. Complete cost information was available for 357 recipients. The mean total 2-year cost of transplantation, including donor costs, for recipients of living and deceased donors was $118 347 (95% confidence interval [CI], 110 395-126 299) and $121 121 (95% CI 114 287-127 956), respectively (p = 0.7). The mean cost for a living donor was $18 129 (95% CI 16 845-19 414) and for a deceased donor was $36 989 (95% CI 34 421-39 558). Living donor kidney transplantation has similar costs at 2 years compared with deceased donor transplantation. These results can be used by health care decision makers to inform strategies to increase donation.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".