Mitigating selection bias in organ allocation models

Author:

Schnellinger Erin M.,Cantu Edward,Harhay Michael O.,Schaubel Douglas E.,Kimmel Stephen E.,Stephens-Shields Alisa J.

Abstract

Abstract Background The lung allocation system in the U.S. prioritizes lung transplant candidates based on estimated pre- and post-transplant survival via the Lung Allocation Scores (LAS). However, these models do not account for selection bias, which results from individuals being removed from the waitlist due to receipt of transplant, as well as transplanted individuals necessarily having survived long enough to receive a transplant. Such selection biases lead to inaccurate predictions. Methods We used a weighted estimation strategy to account for selection bias in the pre- and post-transplant models used to calculate the LAS. We then created a modified LAS using these weights, and compared its performance to that of the existing LAS via time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and Bland-Altman plots. Results The modified LAS exhibited better discrimination and calibration than the existing LAS, and led to changes in patient prioritization. Conclusions Our approach to addressing selection bias is intuitive and can be applied to any organ allocation system that prioritizes patients based on estimated pre- and post-transplant survival. This work is especially relevant to current efforts to ensure more equitable distribution of organs.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Health Informatics,Epidemiology

Reference23 articles.

1. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) Policies, effective 1 March 2020. Available: . Accessed 10 March 2020.

2. Veatch RM, Ross LF. Transplantation ethics. 2nd ed: Georgetown University Press. Part III: Allocating Organs; 2015.

3. Egan TM, et al. Development of the new lung allocation system in the United States. Am J Transplant. 2006;6(5 Pt 2):1212–27.

4. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Poole C, Lash TL. “Survivor Bias” in modern epidemiology, 3rd edition, Ch. 12: causal diagrams, pp. 197–198. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.

5. Egleston BL, et al. Causal inference for non-mortality outcomes in the presence of death. Biostatistics. 2007;8(3):526–45.

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3