ArticleTransplantation direct2025
Longitudinal Assessment of Performance Status in US Liver Transplantation: National Trends and Survival Implications.
Article in Transplantation direct, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The effectiveness of mitigating performance status decline on the liver transplant (LT) waitlist and the impact of dynamic performance status changes on posttransplant outcomes remain understudied. Methods: This US nationwide retrospective cohort study analyzed adult LT candidates listed between 2015 and 2023. Trends in the proportion of low Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) at listing and LT were analyzed. The trend in ΔKPS, representing the change in KPS between waitlisting and LT, was evaluated using linear regression, and its impact on post-LT mortality was estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Inverse probability censoring weighting accounted for selection bias from death or dropout before LT. Results: Among 57 917 LT candidates, 39.5% had a low KPS (10%-40%) at listing. The likelihood of low KPS at waitlisting increased during the study period; however, there was a significant improvement in KPS at LT ( Conclusions: Although the transplant community has mitigated low KPS on the LT waitlist, optimizing post-LT outcomes, only modest improvement was seen in patients with high (≥30) MELD scores at listing. These findings highlight the need to enhance functional status in LT candidates and ensure timely transplants for patients with high MELD scores.
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.