Predictive Models for Kidney Offer Acceptance: Challenges and Strategies.

IF 2.2 Q3 SURGERY
Journal of Transplantation Pub Date : 2026-01-09 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.1155/joot/8243450
Carlos Martinez, Md Nasir, Meghana Kshirsagar, Cass McCharen, Rae Shean, Juan Lavista Ferres, Rahul Dodhia, William B Weeks
{"title":"Predictive Models for Kidney Offer Acceptance: Challenges and Strategies.","authors":"Carlos Martinez, Md Nasir, Meghana Kshirsagar, Cass McCharen, Rae Shean, Juan Lavista Ferres, Rahul Dodhia, William B Weeks","doi":"10.1155/joot/8243450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Predicting whether an organ offer will be accepted for transplantation remains challenging for several reasons, including large offer volumes, highly imbalanced observations (more declines than acceptances), and lack of information about the human decision-making process. Offer acceptance models are used for risk-adjusted program evaluations and policy development, but there is a lack of literature on baselines and best practices for predictive applications. We compared a suite of machine learning models, feature sets, and sampling procedures to identify performance impacts when training offer acceptance prediction models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated several kidney offer acceptance models from logistic regression to gradient boosted trees that were trained on donor and candidate characteristics. We then selected the best-performing model and augmented training data with additional features (e.g., distance from the closest airport to the transplant hospital) or additional sampling procedures (e.g., undersampling).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to the baseline logistic regression model (average precision: 0.0645), the XGBoost model offered the best performance improvement over the baseline (average precision: 0.0907). Including transportation-related features in the model further improved model performance (average precision: 0.0940); however, we did not observe substantial model performance differences based on the sampling procedure used.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Leveraging advanced machine learning models and incorporating nonclinical datapoints (like transportation distances) can improve transplant organ offer acceptance prediction models. However, we observed steep tradeoffs between precision and recall as captured in the low average precision scores despite deceptively high AUROCs (baseline AUROC 0.832). Our findings suggest that even the best-performing models would not provide clear, equitable benefits over existing allocation policies. More research is needed before these models are practical for clinical implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":45795,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Transplantation","volume":"2026 ","pages":"8243450"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12784377/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/joot/8243450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Predicting whether an organ offer will be accepted for transplantation remains challenging for several reasons, including large offer volumes, highly imbalanced observations (more declines than acceptances), and lack of information about the human decision-making process. Offer acceptance models are used for risk-adjusted program evaluations and policy development, but there is a lack of literature on baselines and best practices for predictive applications. We compared a suite of machine learning models, feature sets, and sampling procedures to identify performance impacts when training offer acceptance prediction models.

Methods: We evaluated several kidney offer acceptance models from logistic regression to gradient boosted trees that were trained on donor and candidate characteristics. We then selected the best-performing model and augmented training data with additional features (e.g., distance from the closest airport to the transplant hospital) or additional sampling procedures (e.g., undersampling).

Results: Compared to the baseline logistic regression model (average precision: 0.0645), the XGBoost model offered the best performance improvement over the baseline (average precision: 0.0907). Including transportation-related features in the model further improved model performance (average precision: 0.0940); however, we did not observe substantial model performance differences based on the sampling procedure used.

Conclusions: Leveraging advanced machine learning models and incorporating nonclinical datapoints (like transportation distances) can improve transplant organ offer acceptance prediction models. However, we observed steep tradeoffs between precision and recall as captured in the low average precision scores despite deceptively high AUROCs (baseline AUROC 0.832). Our findings suggest that even the best-performing models would not provide clear, equitable benefits over existing allocation policies. More research is needed before these models are practical for clinical implementation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

肾Offer接受的预测模型:挑战和策略。
背景:预测一个器官是否会被接受用于移植仍然具有挑战性,原因有几个,包括大量的提供,高度不平衡的观察(更多的是拒绝而不是接受),以及缺乏关于人类决策过程的信息。要约接受模型用于风险调整计划评估和政策制定,但是缺乏关于预测应用的基线和最佳实践的文献。我们比较了一套机器学习模型、特征集和抽样程序,以确定当训练提供可接受性预测模型时对性能的影响。方法:我们评估了几种肾提供接受模型,从逻辑回归到梯度增强树,这些模型是根据供体和候选特征训练的。然后,我们选择了表现最好的模型,并使用附加特征(例如,从最近的机场到移植医院的距离)或附加采样程序(例如,不足采样)增强了训练数据。结果:与基线逻辑回归模型(平均精度:0.0645)相比,XGBoost模型比基线(平均精度:0.0907)提供了最好的性能改进。在模型中加入交通相关特征,进一步提高了模型性能(平均精度:0.0940);然而,我们没有观察到基于所使用的抽样程序的实质性模型性能差异。结论:利用先进的机器学习模型并结合非临床数据点(如交通距离)可以改进移植器官接受预测模型。然而,我们观察到精度和召回率之间的严重权衡,尽管AUROC看似很高(基线AUROC 0.832),但平均精度分数较低。我们的研究结果表明,即使是表现最好的模型也无法提供比现有分配政策更清晰、更公平的收益。在这些模型用于临床应用之前,还需要进行更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
4.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书