Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 254

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of the Pediatric Patient for Liver Transplantation: 2014 Practice Guideline by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, American Society of Transplantation and the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition

Open access
Squires, Robert H., Ng, Vicky, Romero, Rene, Ekong, Udeme, Hardikar, Winita, Emre, Sukru, Mazariegos, George V.·2014·Hepatology

Abstract

PreambleCurrent American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) liver transplant evaluation guidelines include both adult and pediatric patients.1 While pediatric liver transplants account for 7.8% of all liver transplants in the United States, sufficient differences between pediatric and adult patients seeking liver transplantation (LT) now require independent, yet complementary documents.This document will focus on pediatric issues at each level of the evaluation process.Disease categories suitable for referral to a pediatric LT program are similar to adults: acute liver failure, autoimmune, cholestasis, metabolic or genetic, oncologic, vascular, and infectious.However, specific etiologies and outcomes differ widely from adult patients, justifying independent pediatric guidelines.Data supporting our recommendations are based on a Medline search of the English language literature from 1997 to the present.Intended for use by physicians, these recommendations suggest preferred approaches to the diagnostic, therapeutic, and preventive aspects of care.They are intended to be flexible, in contrast to standards of care, which are inflexible policies to be followed in every case.Specific recommendations are based on relevant published information.To more fully characterize the available evidence supporting the recommendations, the AASLD Practice Guidelines Committee has adopted the classification used by the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) workgroup with minor modifications (Table 1).The classifications and recommendations are based on three categories: the source of evidence in levels I through III; the

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hep.27191

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 254

Metadata

Authors
Squires, R. H., Ng, V., Romero, R., Ekong, U., Hardikar, W., Emre, S., & Mazariegos, G. V.
Venue
Hepatology
Published
2014-07
Volume
60
Issue
1
Pages
362-398
ISSN
0270-9139 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2089416968
Cited by
254
References
8
FWCI
12.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of the Pediatric Patient for Liver Transplantation: 2014 Practice Guideline by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, American Society of Transplantation and the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hep.27191
The paper
Squires, R. H., Ng, V., Romero, R., Ekong, U., Hardikar, W., Emre, S., & Mazariegos, G. V. (2014). Evaluation of the Pediatric Patient for Liver Transplantation: 2014 Practice Guideline by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, American Society of Transplantation and the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition. Hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.27191

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.