Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning in liver transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Liver transplantation (LT) is a life-saving treatment for individuals with end-stage liver disease. The management of LT recipients is complex, predominantly because of the need to consider demographic, clinical, laboratory, pathology, imaging, and omics data in the development of an appropriate treatment plan. Current methods to collate clinical information are susceptible to some degree of subjectivity; thus, clinical decision-making in LT could benefit from the data-driven approach offered by artificial intelligence (AI). Machine learning and deep learning could be applied in both the pre- and post-LT settings. Some examples of AI applications pre-transplant include optimising transplant candidacy decision-making and donor-recipient matching to reduce waitlist mortality and improve post-transplant outcomes. In the post-LT setting, AI could help guide the management of LT recipients, particularly by predicting patient and graft survival, along with identifying risk factors for disease recurrence and other associated complications. Although AI shows promise in medicine, there are limitations to its clinical deployment which include dataset imbalances for model training, data privacy issues, and a lack of available research practices to benchmark model performance in the real world. Overall, AI tools have the potential to enhance personalised clinical decision-making, especially in the context of liver transplant medicine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".