Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Aug;14(8):1723-30.
doi: 10.1111/ajt.12777.

Big data in organ transplantation: registries and administrative claims

Review

Big data in organ transplantation: registries and administrative claims

A B Massie et al. Am J Transplant. 2014 Aug.

Erratum in

  • Am J Transplant. 2014 Nov;14(11):2673. Kuricka, L M [corrected to Kucirka, L M]
  • Erratum.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] Am J Transplant. 2014 Nov;14(11):2673. doi: 10.1111/ajt.13038. Am J Transplant. 2014. PMID: 28346977 No abstract available.

Abstract

The field of organ transplantation benefits from large, comprehensive, transplant-specific national data sets available to researchers. In addition to the widely used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN)-based registries (the United Network for Organ Sharing and Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data sets) and United States Renal Data System (USRDS) data sets, there are other publicly available national data sets, not specific to transplantation, which have historically been underutilized in the field of transplantation. Of particular interest are the Nationwide Inpatient Sample and State Inpatient Databases, produced by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The USRDS database provides extensive data relevant to studies of kidney transplantation. Linkage of publicly available data sets to external data sources such as private claims or pharmacy data provides further resources for registry-based research. Although these resources can transcend some limitations of OPTN-based registry data, they come with their own limitations, which must be understood to avoid biased inference. This review discusses different registry-based data sources available in the United States, as well as the proper design and conduct of registry-based research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

DISCLOSURE

The authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose as described by the American Journal of Transplantation.

References

    1. Dickinson DM, Dykstra DM, Levine GN, Li S, Welch JC, Webb RL. Transplant data: sources, collection and research considerations, 2004. American Journal of Transplantation. 2005;5(4p2):850–861. - PubMed
    1. Young BY, Gill J, Huang E, Takemoto SK, Anastasi B, Shah T, et al. Living donor kidney versus simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant in type I diabetics: an analysis of the OPTN/UNOS database. Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN. 2009;4(4):845–852. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Massie AB, Zeger SL, Montgomery RA, Segev DL. The effects of DonorNet 2007 on kidney distribution equity and efficiency. Am J Transplant. 2009;9(7):1550–1557. - PubMed
    1. Segev DL, Muzaale AD, Caffo BS, Mehta SH, Singer AL, Taranto SE, et al. Perioperative mortality and long-term survival following live kidney donation. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association. 2010;303(10):959–966. - PubMed
    1. Dickinson D, Arrington C, Fant G, Levine G, Schaubel D, Pruett T, et al. SRTR Program-Specific Reports on Outcomes: A Guide for the New Reader. American Journal of Transplantation. 2008;8(4p2):1012–1026. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms