Outcomes in infants listed for liver transplantation: A retrospective cohort study using the United Network for Organ Sharing database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LT in neonates and young infants can be challenging due to a variety of factors. To describe the waitlist mortality rates and outcomes of patients listed and transplanted as infants identified from the UNOS database. Infants listed for LT between January 1985 and September 2010 were identified from the UNOS database. Mortality on the waitlist as well as outcomes post-LT was compared between infants aged ≤60 days (Group 1), 61-179 days (Group 2), and 180-364 days (Group 3). Of 6763 infants listed for LT (Group 1 n = 496, Group 2 n = 2404, Group 3 n = 3863), mean age at listing was 196 ± 87 days (Group 1, 29 ± 16 days; Group 2, 132 ± 32 days; Group 3, 257 ± 52 days). Waitlist mortality was highest in Group 1 (Group 1 vs. 3 HR 3.01, 95% CI 2.19-4.15, Group 2 vs. Group 3 HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66-1.03). One- and five-yr graft survival was 59.6% and 42% (Group 1), 66% and 45% (Group 2), and 66.8% and 41% (Group 3) (one-yr survival p = 0.20; five-yr survival p = 0.19). Infants listed for LT at age ≤60 days had greater waitlist mortality risk than older infants. Infants undergoing LT at age ≤60 days had similar rates of patient and graft survival to older infants.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".