Published online Mar 25, 2026. doi: 10.5527/wjn.v15.i1.116879
Revised: January 12, 2026
Accepted: February 9, 2026
Published online: March 25, 2026
Processing time: 111 Days and 7.3 Hours
Over the last decade, the use of machine learning (ML) techniques in problem modeling and solving has increased significantly, including in kidney trans
To compare various ML models with LR in predicting DGF, focusing on donor characteristics.
We analyzed 523 deceased donor kidney transplants performed between 2010 and 2020 across three transplant centers. The dataset included 14 donors, 3 trans
The best-performing model for each problem type achieved accuracies of 70% (RF), 70% (RF), 58% (RF), and 61% (XGB) for donor-only, donor + transplant, donor + recipient, and donor + transplant + recipient, respectively. LR achieved accuracies of 57%, 66%, 52% and 66%; however, these models generally showed low sensitivity and high specificity. Across most of them, significant predictors included donor creatinine, age, and mean blood pressure, cold ischemia time (transplant variable), and recipient smoking condition.
While most ML models outperformed LR, the differences were not substantial. This may be attributed to the small dataset size, which likely contributed to the overall poor performance. We recommend using these complex models with high-quality datasets that include a sufficient number of variables and observations to fully leverage their potential. The key question for future research is determining the dataset size required for ML to become the pri
Core Tip: Machine learning (ML) is increasingly used in kidney transplantation research, including predicting delayed graft function. This study compares six ML models with logit across four donor, transplant, and recipient variable combinations. The dataset comprises 44.7% delayed graft function-positive cases. All methods have similar performances, with accuracies between 58%-70%. Important predictors included donor creatinine, age, and mean blood pressure, cold-ischemia time, and recipient smoking condition. Although ML approaches slightly outperformed logit, overall performance remained modest, likely due to limited sample-size. Further research should define dataset scale and quality for ML to become a primary analytic tool for predicting kidney transplant outcomes.
