Cited by 30Sex and Gender in HealthcareDiversity and Career in MedicineOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes

Implicit bias and the gender inequity in liver transplantation

Open access
Lai, Jennifer C., Pomfret, Elizabeth A., Verna, Elizabeth C.·2022·American Journal of Transplantation

Abstract

Women with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation are less likely to receive a transplant and more likely to die than men. While differences in body size and estimation of kidney function are well-studied contributors to this gender inequity, what has received relatively little mention as a potential contributing factor is the possibility of implicit bias. Implicit bias is defined as "any unconscious or unacknowledged preference that affects a person's outlook or behavior." The undeniable presence of implicit bias, a factor that is known to negatively influence health outcomes for women, within our health care system means that patients interacting within our transplant system may still experience unequal treatment despite our best efforts to modify the allocation system at the national level. Awareness of this additional source of gender-based disparities is the first step. In this article, we posit that implicit bias in liver transplantation may exacerbate the gender inequity in transplant access and provide examples in the literature to support this assertion. Lastly, we offer strategies that could be applied at the individual or the healthcare delivery system levels to help reduce the influence of implicit bias on the gender inequity in liver transplantation.

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 · 10.1111/ajt.16986

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [9]Bargh JA. Conditional automaticity: Varieties of automatic influence in social perception and cognition. Unintended Thought. The Guilford Press; 1989: 3– 51.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lai, J. C., Pomfret, E. A., & Verna, E. C.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of Colorado Denver (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Lai, Jennifer C.
  • Pomfret, Elizabeth A.
Venue
American Journal of Transplantation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-06
Volume
22
Issue
6
Pages
1515-1518
ISSN
1600-6135 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4210389457
Cited by
30
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 1
FWCI
5.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Transplantation (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R01AG059183, P30 DK026743)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Sex and Gender in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Keywords
implicit bias, gender inequity, liver transplantation, access to transplantation, gender disparities in health care, organ allocation
MeSH terms
Bias, Implicit, Delivery of Health Care, Female, Humans, Male, Liver Transplantation, Healthcare Disparities

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