MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123440207 · doi:10.1287/opre.1120.1064

A Broader View of Designing the Liver Allocation System

2012· article· en· W2123440207 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooKellogg's (Canada)
FundersSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-MadisonInstitute for Clinical and Translational Research, University of Wisconsin, MadisonUniversity of WaterlooNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsUnited Network for Organ SharingWaiting listQueueComputer scienceMetric (unit)TransplantationMathematical optimizationMedicineLiver transplantationOperations researchOperations managementEconomicsMathematicsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of designing an efficient system for allocating donated livers to patients waiting for transplantation. The trade-off between medical urgency and efficiency is at the heart of the liver allocation problem. We model the transplant waiting list as a multiclass fluid model of overloaded queues, which captures the disease evolution by allowing the patients to switch between classes, i.e., health levels. We consider the bicriteria objective of minimizing total number of patient deaths while waiting for transplantation (NPDWT) and maximizing total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) through a weighted combination. On one hand, under the objective of minimizing NPDWT, the current policy of United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) emerges as the optimal policy, providing a theoretical justification for the current practice. On the other hand, under the metric of maximizing QALYs, the optimal policy is an intuitive dynamic index policy that ranks patients based on their marginal benefit from transplantation, i.e., the difference in benefit with versus without transplantation. Finally, we perform a detailed simulation study to compare the performances of our proposed policies and the current UNOS policy along the following metrics: total QALYs, NPDWT, number of patient deaths after transplantation, number of total patient deaths, and number of wasted livers. Numerical experiments show that our proposed policy for maximizing QALYs outperforms the current UNOS policy along all metrics except the NPDWT.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it