Range and Consistency of Infection Outcomes Reported in Trials Conducted in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Infection remains a leading cause of death in kidney transplant recipients. This study aimed to assess the scope and consistency of infection outcomes reported in contemporary trials conducted in kidney transplant recipients. METHODS: A literature review of all randomized trials and trial protocols reporting infection outcomes in adult kidney transplant recipients was identified in the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialized Register from January 2014 to July 2019. Characteristics and infection outcomes from the trials were analyzed. RESULTS: From 102 included trials, 772 outcome measures were extracted and categorized into 216 unique measures with a median of 3.2 outcome measures per trial (range: 1-9). Measures were further grouped into 32 outcomes based on site of infection (14 outcomes) and organism (18 outcomes). The most commonly reported site-specific outcome and organism-specific outcome were systemic infection (71% trials) and cytomegalovirus infection (62% trials), respectively. Outcome metric and methods of aggregation included mean, median, proportion, proportional change, and number of patients with at least 1 episode. Across all trials, measures were assessed at 55 different time points with a range of 1-11 time points per trial. CONCLUSIONS: Infection outcomes in kidney transplant recipients were frequently reported by site and organism but varied widely in terms of outcome, metrics, method of aggregation, and time point of measurement. Establishment of core outcomes for infection based on the shared priorities of patients/caregivers and health professionals may improve the consistency, comparability, and usefulness of trial evidence.
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 | 0.131 | 0.466 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.023 | 0.023 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".