ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Use of Machine Learning in the Diagnosis of Kidney Allograft Rejection: Current Knowledge and Applications.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rejection-Focused Precision Medicine in Kidney Transplantation: Biology, Biomarkers, and Artificial Intelligence.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-enhanced interpretation of kidney transplant biopsy: focus on rejection.Current opinion in organ transplantation · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Kidney allograft rejection is one of the main limitations to long-term kidney transplant survival. The diagnostic gold standard for detecting rejection is a kidney biopsy, an invasive procedure that can often give imprecise results due to complex diagnostic criteria and high interobserver variability. In recent years, several additional diagnostic approaches to rejection have been investigated, some of them with the aid of machine learning (ML). In this review, we addressed studies that investigated the detection of kidney allograft rejection over the last decade using various ML algorithms. Various ML techniques were used in three main categories: (a) histopathologic assessment of kidney tissue with the aim to improve the diagnostic accuracy of a kidney biopsy, (b) assessment of gene expression in rejected kidney tissue or peripheral blood and the development of diagnostic classifiers based on these data, (c) radiologic assessment of kidney tissue using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and the construction of a computer-aided diagnostic system. In histopathology, ML algorithms could serve as a support to the pathologist to avoid misclassifications and overcome interobserver variability. Diagnostic platforms based on biopsy-based transcripts serve as a supplement to a kidney biopsy, especially in cases where histopathologic diagnosis is inconclusive. ML models based on radiologic evaluation or gene signature in peripheral blood may be useful in cases where kidney biopsy is contraindicated in addition to other non-invasive biomarkers. The implementation of ML-based diagnostic methods is usually slow and undertaken with caution considering ethical and legal issues. In summary, the approach to the diagnosis of rejection should be individualized and based on all available diagnostic tools (including ML-based), leaving the responsibility for over- and under-treatment in the hands of the clinician.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.