Augmenting the Transplant Team With Artificial Intelligence: Toward Meaningful AI Use in Solid Organ Transplant
Open accessAbstract
Advances in systems immunology, such as new biomarkers, offer the potential for highly personalized immunosuppression regimens that could improve patient outcomes. In the future, integrating all of this information with other patient history data will likely have to rely on artificial intelligence (AI). AI agents can help augment transplant decision making by discovering patterns and making predictions for specific patients that are not covered in the literature or in ways that are impossible for humans to anticipate by integrating vast amounts of data (e.g. trending across numerous biomarkers). Similar to other clinical decision support systems, AI may help overcome human biases or judgment errors. However, AI is not widely utilized in transplant to date. In this rapid review, we survey the methods employed in recent research in transplant-related AI applications and identify concerns related to implementing these tools. We identify three key challenges (bias/accuracy, clinical decision process/AI explainability, AI acceptability criteria) holding back AI in transplant. We also identify steps that can be taken in the near term to help advance meaningful use of AI in transplant (forming a Transplant AI Team at each center, establishing clinical and ethical acceptability criteria, and incorporating AI into the Shared Decision Making Model).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
In organ transplantation, AI could assist in matching donors with recipients efficiently, but ethical nuances such as patient preferences, medical histories, and urgency require human judgment.
“In organ transplantation, AI could assist in matching donors with recipients efficiently.However, ethical nuances such as patient preferences, medical histories, and urgency require human judgment [124], [125].”
From Ethical Framework for Harnessing the Power of AI in Healthcare and Beyond (2024) · cites this paper as [124]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 23 · Cited by 48
- Authors
- Clement, J., & Maldonado, A. Q.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Hansa Biopharma (Sweden) (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Clement, Jeffrey
- ORCID
- Maldonado, Angela Q.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Immunology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2021-06-11
- Volume
- 12
- Pages
- 694222-694222
- ISSN
- 1664-3224 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8226178
- OpenAlex
- W3172289389
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4
- FWCI
- 1.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Immunology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence, solid organ transplantation, clinical decision support, personalized immunosuppression, biomarkers, algorithmic bias, algorithmic transparency, shared decision-making, AI implementation challenges
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Decision-Making, Artificial Intelligence, Decision Support Techniques, Humans, Patient Care Team, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Reproducibility of Results, Organ Transplantation, Data Mining, Meaningful Use
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