Note on sources: The articles in this report are based on the reference tables in the 2004 OPTN/SRTR Annual Report, which are not included in this publication. Tables from the Annual Report that serve as the basis for this article include the following: Tables 1.3, 1.5, 1.7, 5.2, 5.8, 5.9, 5.10, 5.11, 6.2, 6.8, 6.9, 6.10, 6.11, 7.2, 7.8, 7.7, 7.8, 7.9, 7.10, 7.11, 8.2, 8.8, 8.9, 8.10, 8.11, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.11, 10.2, 10.8, 10.9, 10.10, 10.11, 11.8, 11.9, 11.10, 11.11, 12.2, 12.8, 12.9, 12.10, 12.11, 13.2, 13.8, 13.9, 13.10, and 13.11. All of these tables may be found online at http://www.ustransplant.org.
Analytical approaches for transplant research, 2004
Article first published online: 10 MAR 2005
American Journal of Transplantation
Volume 5, Issue 4p2, pages 950–957, April 2005
How to Cite
Schaubel, D. E., Dykstra, D. M., Murrayc, S., Ashby, V. B., McCullough, K. P., Dickinson, D. M., Hulbert-Shearon, T. E., Webb, R. L. and Wolfe, R. A. (2005), Analytical approaches for transplant research, 2004. American Journal of Transplantation, 5: 950–957. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6135.2005.00837.x
Funding: The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) is funded by contract number 231-00-0116 from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), US Department of Health and Human Services. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the US Government. This is a US Government-sponsored work. There are no restrictions on its use.
- Issue published online: 10 MAR 2005
- Article first published online: 10 MAR 2005
- Death ascertainment;
- statistical analysis;
- survival analysis;
- transplantation research
This article provides detailed explanations of the methods frequently employed in outcomes analyses performed by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). All aspects of the analytical process are discussed, including cohort selection, post-transplant follow-up analysis, outcome definition, ascertainment of events, censoring, and adjustments. The methods employed for descriptive analyses are described, such as unadjusted mortality rates and survival probabilities, and the estimation of covariant effects through regression modeling. A section on transplant waiting time focuses on the kidney and liver waiting lists, pointing out the different considerations each list requires and the larger questions that such analyses raise. Additionally, this article describes specialized modeling strategies recently designed by the SRTR and aimed at specific organ allocation issues. The article concludes with a description of simulated allocation modeling (SAM), which has been developed by the SRTR for three organ systems: liver, thoracic organs, and kidney-pancreas. SAMs are particularly useful for comparing outcomes for proposed national allocation policies. The use of SAMs has already helped in the development and implementation of a new policy for liver candidates with high MELD scores to be offered organs regionally before the organs are offered to candidates with low MELD scores locally.