PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Alvin E Roth

Publications and source records attributed to Alvin E Roth.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Increasing the opportunity of live kidney donation by matching for two- and three-way exchanges.

BACKGROUND: To expand the opportunity for paired live donor kidney transplantation, computerized matching algorithms have been designed to identify maximal sets of compatible donor/recipient pairs from a registry of incompatible pairs submitted as candidates for transplantation. METHODS: Demographic data of patients who had been evaluated for live donor kidney transplantation but found to be incompatible with their potential donor (because of ABO blood group or positive crossmatch) were submitted for computer analysis and matching. Data included ABO and HLA types of donor and recipient, %PRA and specificity of recipient alloantibody, donor/recipient relationship, and the reason the donor was incompatible. The data set used for the initial simulation included 29 patients with one donor each and 16 patients with multiple donors for a total of 45 patients and 68 donor/patient pairs. In addition, a simulation based on OPTN/SRTR data was used to further assess the practical importance of multiple exchange combinations. RESULTS: If only exchanges involving two patient-donor pairs were allowed, a maximum of 8 patient-donor pairs in the data set could exchange kidneys. If three-way exchanges were also allowed, a maximum of 11 pairs could exchange kidneys. Simulations with OPTN/SRTR data demonstrate that the increase in the number of potential transplants if three-way exchanges are allowed is robust, and does not depend on the particular patients in our sample. CONCLUSIONS: A computerized matching protocol can be used to identify donor/recipient pairs from a registry of incompatible pairs who can potentially enter into donor exchanges that otherwise would not readily occur.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2004

The Nash equilibrium: a perspective.

In 1950, John Nash contributed a remarkable one-page PNAS article that defined and characterized a notion of equilibrium for n- person games. This notion, now called the "Nash equilibrium," has been widely applied and adapted in economics and other behavioral sciences. Indeed, game theory, with the Nash equilibrium as its centerpiece, is becoming the most prominent unifying theory of social science. In this perspective, we summarize the historical context and subsequent impact of Nash's contribution.

Economics↗
PubMed2004

The gastroenterology fellowship Match: how it failed and why it could succeed once again.

The market for gastroenterology (GI) fellows adopted a centralized Match in 1986, and abandoned it in the late 1990s. We discuss why the Match initially was adopted, how and why it broke down, what differences this has made in the market for fellows, and what would be needed to restart the Match successfully. We assess the effects of the Match by comparing the GI fellows market now with when the Match was operating, and with the fellowship markets for internal medicine subspecialties that continue to use a Match. The breakdown of a well-functioning Match is rare, but may be caused by unusual shifts in market conditions, such as those experienced by gastroenterology in the late 1990s. The problems the gastroenterology Match originally was designed to solve re-emerged with the demise of the Match. The market has become more local and less national, than when there was a Match in place, and program recruitment of fellows occurs earlier and is more dispersed in time than internal medicine subspecialties that continue to use a Match. There is no evidence that the demise of the Match has had any effect on wages. The evidence strongly suggests that the Match could be reintroduced successfully, which would increase the mobility of potential GI fellows, allow potential fellows to compete for the widest range of programs, and allow programs to compete for the widest range of fellows.

Antitrust Laws↗
PubMed2003

The origins, history, and design of the resident match.

In the early 1900s, competition among hospitals for interns and among medical students for good internships led to increasingly early offers of internships to students. By the 1940s, appointments were often made as early as the beginning of the junior year of medical school. Hospitals thus had little information about students' performance, and students frequently had to make a final decision to accept or reject an offer without knowing which other offers might be forthcoming. From 1945 through 1951, efforts were made to enforce a uniform date for accepting offers. However, students were still faced with offers having very short deadlines, compelling them to accept or reject offers without knowing what other offers might be forthcoming. Hospitals often had to scramble for available students, since if an offer was rejected, it was often too late for them to reach their next preferred candidate. A centralized clearinghouse was thus developed as a way of alleviating this chaos and allowing a larger role to the preferences of both students and hospitals. This evolved into the current matching program, whose algorithm continues to be updated to take account of changing needs of applicants, such as growth in the number of couples who seek 2 positions in the same vicinity.

Algorithms↗