Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 300

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Summary of Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors

Open access
Lentine, Krista L., Kasiske, Bertram L., Levey, Andrew S., Adams, Patricia L., Alberú, Josefina, Bakr, Mohamed A., Gallon, Lorenzo, Garvey, Catherine A., Guleria, Sandeep, Li, Philip Kam-Tao, Segev, Dorry L., Taler, Sandra J., Tanabe, Kazunari, Wright, Linda, Zeier, Martin G., Cheung, Michael, Garg, Amit X.·2017·Transplantation
DOI 10.1097/tp.0000000000001770
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In Brief Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) engaged an evidence review team and convened a work group to produce a guideline to evaluate and manage candidates for living kidney donation. The evidence for most guideline recommendations is sparse and many “ungraded” expert consensus recommendations were made to guide the donor candidate evaluation and care before, during, and after donation. The guideline advocates for replacing decisions based on assessments of single risk factors in isolation with a comprehensive approach to risk assessment using the best available evidence. The approach to simultaneous consideration of each candidate’s profile of demographic and health characteristics advances a new framework for assessing donor candidate risk and for defensible shared decision making. One of the most important tasks we have to undertake is to evaluate and then care for living donors. This paper provides a summary of the KDIGO Guidelines and encapsulates what you will find in the guidelines themselves, which are published in full in a separate supplement. Care of our living kidney donors is not an evidence free void for personal opinion and practice to fill–there are data.

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 · 10.1097/tp.0000000000001770

Cites

28 of 28 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 28 references

Metadata

Authors
Lentine, K. L., Kasiske, B. L., Levey, A. S., Adams, P. L., Alberú, J., Bakr, M. A., Gallon, L., Garvey, C. A., Guleria, S., Li, P. K.-T., Segev, D. L., Taler, S. J., Tanabe, K., Wright, L., Zeier, M. G., Cheung, M., & Garg, A. X.
Venue
Transplantation
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2017-08
Volume
101
Issue
8
Pages
1783-1792
ISSN
0041-1337 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/tp.0000000000001770
OpenAlex
W2738954518
Cited by
300
References
28
FWCI
29.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Summary of Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/tp.0000000000001770
The paper
Lentine, K. L., Kasiske, B. L., Levey, A. S., Adams, P. L., Alberú, J., Bakr, M. A., Gallon, L., Garvey, C. A., Guleria, S., Li, P. K.-T., Segev, D. L., Taler, S. J., Tanabe, K., Wright, L., Zeier, M. G., Cheung, M., & Garg, A. X. (2017). Summary of Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors. Transplantation. https://doi.org/10.1097/tp.0000000000001770

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.