MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1789080367 · doi:10.1111/ctr.12660

Incidence, etiology, and significance of acute kidney injury in the early post‐kidney transplant period

2015· article· en· W1789080367 on OpenAlexaff
Romuald Panek, Karthik Tennankore, Bryce Kiberd

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Transplantation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersAstellas Pharma
KeywordsMedicineAcute kidney injuryCreatinineRenal functionIncidence (geometry)EtiologyUrinary systemKidney transplantationClinical significanceKidneyInternal medicineUrologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about the incidence, causes, and significance of acute kidney injury (AKI) in the early transplant period. This study used a definition as >26 μmol/L increase in creatinine within 48 h or >50% increase over a period >48 h. In 326 adult consecutive recipients of a solitary kidney transplant from 2006 to 2014 followed at this center, 21% developed AKI within the first six months. Most etiologies were CNI toxicity (33%) or unknown (26%), whereas acute rejection accounted for 17% and urinary tract obstruction for 10%. Those with AKI had a significantly lower glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at one-yr post-transplant (adjusted beta coefficient -5.5 mL/min/1.73 m(2) , 95% CI: -10.4, -0.7, p = 0.025) in a multivariable linear regression model. However, the AKI definition missed 6 of 19 episodes of acute rejection and 4 of 10 episodes of urinary tract obstruction. When acute rejection (including those that did not satisfy AKI criteria) was included in the model, other causes of AKI were not significantly associated with GFR at year 1. Although AKI, using current criteria, is likely to be a significant predictor of later outcomes, important causes are missed and the criteria are not sensitive for clinical decision-making.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical TransplantationSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207