Literature DB >> 24787026

Bayesian methods for assessing transplant program performance.

N Salkowski1, J J Snyder, D A Zaun, T Leighton, A K Israni, B L Kasiske.   

Abstract

Based on recommendations from a recent consensus conference and a report commissioned by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to the Committee of Presidents of Statistical Societies, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) plans to adopt Bayesian methods for assessing transplant program performance. Current methods for calculating program-specific reports (PSRs) often generate implausible point estimates of program performance, wide confidence intervals and underpowered conventional statistical tests. Although technically correct, these methods produce statistical summaries that are prone to misinterpretation. The Bayesian approach assumes that performance of most programs is about average and few programs perform much better or much worse than average; thus, strong evidence is required to conclude that performance is extremely good or poor. In Bayesian statistics, inference is performed via a posterior probability distribution, which reflects both the available data and prior beliefs about what model parameter values are most likely. In the PSRs, the posterior distribution of a program-specific hazard ratio will show whether a program is likely to be performing better or worse than average. Bayesian-derived PSRs will be available for preview by programs on the private SRTR website in mid-2014 and will likely replace current methods for public reporting in early 2015. © Copyright 2014 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

Keywords:  Graft survival; mortality; quality assurance; solid organ transplantation

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24787026     DOI: 10.1111/ajt.12707

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Transplant        ISSN: 1600-6135            Impact factor:   8.086


  12 in total

1.  A Five-Tier System for Improving the Categorization of Transplant Program Performance.

Authors:  Andrew Wey; Nicholas Salkowski; Bertram L Kasiske; Ajay K Israni; Jon J Snyder
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Building an Ideal Quality Metric for ESRD Health Care Delivery.

Authors:  Jesse D Schold; Laura D Buccini; Michael P Phelan; Colleen L Jay; David A Goldfarb; Emilio D Poggio; John R Sedor
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 8.237

3.  The relationship between the C-statistic and the accuracy of program-specific evaluations.

Authors:  Andrew Wey; Nicholas Salkowski; Bertram L Kasiske; Melissa A Skeans; Sally K Gustafson; Ajay K Israni; Jon J Snyder
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 8.086

4.  Association of pretransplant and posttransplant program ratings with candidate mortality after listing.

Authors:  Andrew Wey; Sally K Gustafson; Nicholas Salkowski; Bertram L Kasiske; Melissa Skeans; Cory R Schaffhausen; Ajay K Israni; Jon J Snyder
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 8.086

5.  Potential Implications of Recent and Proposed Changes in the Regulatory Oversight of Solid Organ Transplantation in the United States.

Authors:  B L Kasiske; N Salkowski; A Wey; A K Israni; J J Snyder
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 8.086

6.  Reported effects of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients 5-tier rating system on US transplant centers: results of a national survey.

Authors:  Sarah E Van Pilsum Rasmussen; Alvin G Thomas; Jacqueline Garonzik-Wang; Macey L Henderson; Sarah S Stith; Dorry L Segev; Lauren Hersch Nicholas
Journal:  Transpl Int       Date:  2018-06-10       Impact factor: 3.782

7.  Comparing Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients posttransplant program-specific outcome ratings at listing with subsequent recipient outcomes after transplant.

Authors:  Andrew Wey; Nicholas Salkowski; Bertram L Kasiske; Melissa Skeans; Cory R Schaffhausen; Sally K Gustafson; Ajay K Israni; Jon J Snyder
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2018-08-31       Impact factor: 8.086

8.  A Composite End Point of Graft Status and eGFR at 1 Year to Improve the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients' Five-Tier Rating System.

Authors:  Kaicheng Wang; Yanhong Deng; Darren Stewart; Richard N Formica
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2022-05-10       Impact factor: 14.978

9.  A novel patient-centered "intention-to-treat" metric of U.S. lung transplant center performance.

Authors:  Dawn A Maldonado; Arindam RoyChoudhury; David J Lederer
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2017-09-26       Impact factor: 8.086

10.  Kidney transplant program waitlisting rate as a metric to assess transplant access.

Authors:  Sudeshna Paul; Taylor Melanson; Sumit Mohan; Katherine Ross-Driscoll; Laura McPherson; Raymond Lynch; Denise Lo; Stephen O Pastan; Rachel E Patzer
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2020-09-15       Impact factor: 8.086

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.