ATC Abstracts

American Transplant Congress abstracts

  • Home
  • Meetings Archive
    • 2022 American Transplant Congress
    • 2021 American Transplant Congress
    • 2020 American Transplant Congress
    • 2019 American Transplant Congress
    • 2018 American Transplant Congress
    • 2017 American Transplant Congress
    • 2016 American Transplant Congress
    • 2015 American Transplant Congress
    • 2013 American Transplant Congress
  • Keyword Index
  • Resources
    • 2021 Resources
    • 2016 Resources
      • 2016 Welcome Letter
      • ATC 2016 Program Planning Committees
      • ASTS Council 2015-2016
      • AST Board of Directors 2015-2016
    • 2015 Resources
      • 2015 Welcome Letter
      • ATC 2015 Program Planning Committees
      • ASTS Council 2014-2015
      • AST Board of Directors 2014-2015
      • 2015 Conference Schedule
  • Search

Cognitive Bias in Transplant Surgery: A Qualitative Study of Transplant Clinicians in the United States

K. Ladin1, J. Perry2, C. Eiduson3

1REACH Lab, Tufts University, Medford, MA, 2Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 3University of Rochester School of Medicine & Dentistry, Rochester, NY

Meeting: 2022 American Transplant Congress

Abstract number: 76

Keywords: Ethics, Psychosocial, Public policy, Risk factors

Topic: Clinical Science » Organ Inclusive » 70 - Non-Organ Specific: Disparities to Outcome and Access to Healthcare

Session Information

Session Name: Disparities to Outcome and Access to Healthcare

Session Type: Rapid Fire Oral Abstract

Date: Sunday, June 5, 2022

Session Time: 3:30pm-5:00pm

 Presentation Time: 4:50pm-5:00pm

Location: Hynes Room 311

*Purpose: Clinicians’ judgments about patients’ social support often affect whether patients are listed for transplantation. Decision-making is thought to be based on two systems of information processing: automatic (System 1) and controlled (System 2). System 1 processing is fast, intuitive, largely subconscious, and highly bias-prone. By contrast, System 2 utilizes effortful, intentional, and conscious thinking to inform decision-making. Subjective criteria, such as social support, can unwittingly introduce bias that may disproportionately harm structurally disadvantaged populations. We examined clinician perspectives and experiences using social support and identified cognitive biases associated with this criterion.

*Methods: Semi-structured, cognitive interviews were conducted as part of a national mixed-methods study of social support in transplantation. Clinicians were recruited following purposive sampling criteria: gender, clinical role (e.g. surgeon, social worker), organ type, region, and percentage of patients excluded from transplant due to social support in the prior year. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically using inductive and deductive approaches.

*Results: We completed 45 semi-structured interviews with transplant clinicians at 34 centers across all UNOS regions. Approximately 47% of these clinicians were women, 11-44% for each organ, 49% psychosocial providers. We found widespread lack of objective criteria in assessing social support facilitate reliance on System 1 error-prone intuition, rather that conscious, deliberate, and evidenced-based decision-making. Discussion of social support at listing meetings commonly triggered invocation of social worth beliefs, and contributed to stereotyping patients with limited social support as less deserving of an organ. Confirmation bias, Hindsight Bias, Availability Bias, and Group Think were most commonly associated with use of social support in waitlist decisions. Examples of clinicians engaging in System 2 processing were examined. These clinicians seldom relied on social support in waitlist determinations.

*Conclusions: Social support requirements may reinforce transplant inequities by increasing susceptibility to cognitive biases, contributing to biased and inconsistent listing procedures. Although patients’ ability to meet post-operative demands associated with social support should be assessed, a strengths-based approach and interventions aimed at reducing bias are needed to ensure equitable access to transplant.

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Ladin K, Perry J, Eiduson C. Cognitive Bias in Transplant Surgery: A Qualitative Study of Transplant Clinicians in the United States [abstract]. Am J Transplant. 2022; 22 (suppl 3). https://atcmeetingabstracts.com/abstract/cognitive-bias-in-transplant-surgery-a-qualitative-study-of-transplant-clinicians-in-the-united-states/. Accessed May 30, 2025.

« Back to 2022 American Transplant Congress

Visit Our Partner Sites

American Transplant Congress (ATC)

Visit the official site for the American Transplant Congress »

American Journal of Transplantation

The official publication for the American Society of Transplantation (AST) and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) »

American Society of Transplantation (AST)

An organization of more than 3000 professionals dedicated to advancing the field of transplantation. »

American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS)

The society represents approximately 1,800 professionals dedicated to excellence in transplantation surgery. »

Copyright © 2013-2025 by American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons. All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Cookie Preferences