Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41716444›Full record

ArticleTransplantation direct2026

Comparison of Multiple Frailty Scoring Metrics in Renal Transplant Candidates: A Large Single-center Cohort Study.

Arielle Cimeno, Samridhi Banskota, Syed Omair Nadeem, Ronald F Parsons

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transplantation direct, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Arielle CimenoDivision of Transplantation, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8179-2569
Samridhi BanskotaDivision of Transplantation, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Syed Omair NadeemDivision of Transplantation, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Ronald F ParsonsDivision of Transplantation, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pretransplant patients are not required to undergo objective frailty testing, although current listing and allocation policies do record functional metrics. Multiple different metrics exist for assessing frailty. Methods: We investigated different frailty metrics in patients presenting for renal transplant evaluation. Four hundred thirty patients underwent both cross-sectional imaging and retrospective chart review to calculate a psoas muscle area (PMA) and modified Frailty Risk Score (FRS), respectively. Of these patients, 264 were also evaluated using the Fried frailty phenotype (FFP). Expected Posttransplant Survival scores for posttransplant patients were calculated. Results: In total, 220 (52.2%) patients were considered frail by at least 1 metric. Of evaluated patients 8.3%, 30.7%, and 24.9% were frail by FFP, FRS, and PMA respectively, compared with 6.6%, 26.4%, and 24.0% of listed patients who were frail by FFP, FRS, and PMA respectively. PMA and FRS identified more frail patients compared with FFP ( Conclusions: Ultimately, patients successfully listed for transplant did not vary in frailty metrics from those who were not listed. These findings suggest that standardized metrics are needed for the evaluation and listing of patients.

Identifiers

PMID41716444
PMCPMC12915718

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.