Hospitalization following pediatric kidney transplantation: An international comparison among a Canadian pediatric transplant center, North American Pediatric Renal Trials and Collaborative Studies, and Cooperative European Pediatric Renal Transplant Initiative registry data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are several databases across the world that collect pediatric KT data. We compare the hospitalization outcomes for pediatric KT recipients from a large Canadian transplant center (SickKids database; The Hospital for Sick Children Kidney Transplantation Institutional Database), United States (NAPRTCS), and Europe (CERTAIN registry). METHODS: An institutional retrospective review of KT was performed between 2000 and 2015. Baseline characteristics, duration of initial hospitalization/readmission at 1-5 and 6- to 11-month posttransplant, and 1-year graft survival data were collected. Corresponding data from the NAPRTCS 2014 Annual Transplant Report and CERTAIN registry were compared. RESULTS: Posttransplant, patients from NAPRTCS had the shortest duration of hospitalization within the first month (10.4 days, SE 0.2), followed by SickKids (20.3 days, SE 0.7) and CERTAIN (25.5 days, SE 0.7). For both living and deceased donor populations, patients from SickKids were most likely to be hospitalized at 1- to 5-month posttransplant (82.4% [89/108]; 72.1% [98/136]), followed by Europe (52.1% [198/380]; 61.6% [501/813]) and United States (45.4% [2379/5241]; 51.4% [2517/4896]). Patients from Europe were most likely to be hospitalized at 6- to 12-month posttransplant (42.1% [160/380]; 51.7% [420/813]), followed by SickKids (35.2% [38/108]; 37.5% [51/136]) and United States (28.3% [1387/4901]; 31.6% [1411/4465]). Across all databases, the most commonly addressed issues during readmissions were infectious complications. CONCLUSION: The differences observed in this investigation may reflect the local reimbursement models, resources for outpatient management, and practice variations across a large Canadian transplant center, United States, and European countries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".