Belen Rivera, Stalin Canizares, Gabriel Cojuc-Konigsberg, Olena Holub, Alex Nakonechnyi, Ritah R Chumdermpadetsuk, Keren Ladin, Devin E Eckhoff, Rebecca Allen, Aditya Pawar
{"title":"肾移植受者选择标准的透明度：一项使用人工智能的全国性分析。","authors":"Belen Rivera, Stalin Canizares, Gabriel Cojuc-Konigsberg, Olena Holub, Alex Nakonechnyi, Ritah R Chumdermpadetsuk, Keren Ladin, Devin E Eckhoff, Rebecca Allen, Aditya Pawar","doi":"10.2196/74066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Choosing a transplant program impacts a patient's likelihood of receiving a kidney transplant. Most patients are unaware of the factors influencing their candidacy. As patients increasingly rely on online resources for healthcare decisions, this study quantifies the available online patient-level information on kidney transplant recipient (KTR) selection criteria across U.S. transplant centers.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to use a natural language processing (NLP) and a LLM to quantify the available online patient-level information regarding guideline-recommended kidney transplant recipient (KTR) selection criteria reported by U.S. transplant centers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study using natural language processing and a large language model was conducted to review the U.S. kidney transplant centers websites from June to August 2024. Links were explored up to three levels deep, and information on 31 guideline-recommended KTR selection criteria was collected from each transplant center.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 255 U.S. kidney transplant centers were analyzed, comprising 10,508 webpages and 9,113,753 words. Among the kidney transplant guideline-recommended KTR selection criteria, only 2.6% of the information was present on the transplant centers webpages. Socioeconomic and behavioral criteria were mentioned more than those related to patient medical conditions and comorbidities. Of the 31 criteria, finances and health insurance was the most frequently mentioned, appearing in 25.5% of the transplant centers. Other socioeconomic and behavioral criteria such as family and social support systems, adherence, and psychosocial assessment, were addressed in less than 4%. No information was found in any webpage for 14 of the criteria. Geographically, disparities in reporting were observed, with the South Atlantic division showing the highest number of distinct criteria, while New England had the fewest.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most transplant center websites do not disclose online patient-level KTR selection criteria. Lack of transparency in the evaluation and listing process for kidney transplantation may limit patients from choosing their most suitable transplant center and successfully receiving a kidney transplant.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrial: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":73551,"journal":{"name":"JMIR AI","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transparency in Kidney Transplant Recipient Selection Criteria: A Nationwide Analysis Using AI.\",\"authors\":\"Belen Rivera, Stalin Canizares, Gabriel Cojuc-Konigsberg, Olena Holub, Alex Nakonechnyi, Ritah R Chumdermpadetsuk, Keren Ladin, Devin E Eckhoff, Rebecca Allen, Aditya Pawar\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/74066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Choosing a transplant program impacts a patient's likelihood of receiving a kidney transplant. Most patients are unaware of the factors influencing their candidacy. As patients increasingly rely on online resources for healthcare decisions, this study quantifies the available online patient-level information on kidney transplant recipient (KTR) selection criteria across U.S. transplant centers.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to use a natural language processing (NLP) and a LLM to quantify the available online patient-level information regarding guideline-recommended kidney transplant recipient (KTR) selection criteria reported by U.S. transplant centers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study using natural language processing and a large language model was conducted to review the U.S. kidney transplant centers websites from June to August 2024. Links were explored up to three levels deep, and information on 31 guideline-recommended KTR selection criteria was collected from each transplant center.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 255 U.S. kidney transplant centers were analyzed, comprising 10,508 webpages and 9,113,753 words. Among the kidney transplant guideline-recommended KTR selection criteria, only 2.6% of the information was present on the transplant centers webpages. Socioeconomic and behavioral criteria were mentioned more than those related to patient medical conditions and comorbidities. Of the 31 criteria, finances and health insurance was the most frequently mentioned, appearing in 25.5% of the transplant centers. Other socioeconomic and behavioral criteria such as family and social support systems, adherence, and psychosocial assessment, were addressed in less than 4%. No information was found in any webpage for 14 of the criteria. Geographically, disparities in reporting were observed, with the South Atlantic division showing the highest number of distinct criteria, while New England had the fewest.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most transplant center websites do not disclose online patient-level KTR selection criteria. Lack of transparency in the evaluation and listing process for kidney transplantation may limit patients from choosing their most suitable transplant center and successfully receiving a kidney transplant.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrial: </strong></p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73551,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR AI\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR AI\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/74066\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR AI","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/74066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Transparency in Kidney Transplant Recipient Selection Criteria: A Nationwide Analysis Using AI.
Background: Choosing a transplant program impacts a patient's likelihood of receiving a kidney transplant. Most patients are unaware of the factors influencing their candidacy. As patients increasingly rely on online resources for healthcare decisions, this study quantifies the available online patient-level information on kidney transplant recipient (KTR) selection criteria across U.S. transplant centers.
Objective: We aimed to use a natural language processing (NLP) and a LLM to quantify the available online patient-level information regarding guideline-recommended kidney transplant recipient (KTR) selection criteria reported by U.S. transplant centers.
Methods: A cross-sectional study using natural language processing and a large language model was conducted to review the U.S. kidney transplant centers websites from June to August 2024. Links were explored up to three levels deep, and information on 31 guideline-recommended KTR selection criteria was collected from each transplant center.
Results: A total of 255 U.S. kidney transplant centers were analyzed, comprising 10,508 webpages and 9,113,753 words. Among the kidney transplant guideline-recommended KTR selection criteria, only 2.6% of the information was present on the transplant centers webpages. Socioeconomic and behavioral criteria were mentioned more than those related to patient medical conditions and comorbidities. Of the 31 criteria, finances and health insurance was the most frequently mentioned, appearing in 25.5% of the transplant centers. Other socioeconomic and behavioral criteria such as family and social support systems, adherence, and psychosocial assessment, were addressed in less than 4%. No information was found in any webpage for 14 of the criteria. Geographically, disparities in reporting were observed, with the South Atlantic division showing the highest number of distinct criteria, while New England had the fewest.
Conclusions: Most transplant center websites do not disclose online patient-level KTR selection criteria. Lack of transparency in the evaluation and listing process for kidney transplantation may limit patients from choosing their most suitable transplant center and successfully receiving a kidney transplant.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
