MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415279443 · doi:10.1097/lvt.0000000000000753

Anonymous living donation expands access and enhances equity in pediatric liver transplantation: A retrospective cohort study

2025· article· en· W4415279443 on OpenAlexaffabout
Toshifumi Yodoshi, Jennifer Stunguris, Maria De Angelis, Krista Van Roestel, Yaron Avitzur, Robert Bandsma, Nicola L. Jones, Binita M. Kamath, Mar Miserachs, Nazia Selzner, Anand Ghanekar, Mark S. Cattral, Blayne A. Sayed, Vicky L. Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueLiver Transplantation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetrospective cohort studyLiver transplantationDisadvantagedDonationTransplantationUnited Network for Organ SharingCohortCohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) confers the best survival to children with end-stage liver disease, yet racial and socioeconomic barriers often preclude access to a biologically or emotionally related donor. Anonymous nondirected LDLT (A-LDLT), whereby altruistic strangers donate, could close this gap and diminish reliance on deceased-donor LT (DDLT), but its equity and efficacy have not been fully quantified. We therefore analyzed all 422 consecutive pediatric liver transplants at a large Canadian center from January 2005 to March 2023. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared recipient demographics, clinical characteristics, waitlist duration, and survival outcomes across A-LDLT (n=62), directed living donor liver transplantation (n=174), and DDLT (n=186) groups. Children who underwent A-LDLT were disproportionately Black or Indigenous, more often lived in single-parent households, and more frequently spoke a non-English primary language, indicating that anonymous donation reached sociodemographically disadvantaged groups. After adjusting for age, diagnosis, era, and pediatric end-stage liver disease/MELD score, median wait time for cholestatic disease was 104 days with A-LDLT versus 138 days with DDLT-a 20% reduction-while operative complexity, vascular or biliary complication rates, and intensive-care stay were comparable to directed LDLT. One-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival rates after A-LDLT were 100%, 98% and 98%, respectively, mirroring directed living donor liver transplantation and exceeding DDLT (96%, 94%, and 93%). Graft survival showed the same pattern. Integrating anonymous nondirected donors enlarges the living donor pool, decreases time to transplantation for vulnerable children, and preserves the superior long-term outcomes achieved with living donor organs. Embedding A-LDLT alongside DDLT can reduce disparities and enable timely, life-saving transplantation for children without directed donors while maintaining the advantages associated with living donor grafts.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiver TransplantationSame topicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207