MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantification of the Early Risk of Death in Elderly Kidney Transplant Recipients

2012· article· en· W1908487555 on OpenAlexaff
John S. Gill, Elke Schäeffner, Steven J. Chadban, Jianghu Dong, Caren Rose, Olwyn Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Transplantation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineKidney transplantKidney transplantationKidneyRisk assessmentInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To inform decision making regarding transplantation in patients ≥ 65 years, we quantified the early posttransplant risk of death by determining the time to equal risk and equal survival between transplant recipients and wait-listed dialysis patients in the United States between 1995 and 2007 (total n = 25 468). Survival was determined using separate multivariate nonproportional hazards analyses in low-, intermediate- and high-risk cardiovascular risk patients. Compared to wait-listed patients with similar cardiovascular risk, standard criteria (SCD) and expanded criteria (ECD) recipients had a higher risk of death in the perioperative and early-posttransplant period. In contrast, low and intermediate risk living donor (LD) recipients had an immediate survival advantage compared to similar risk wait-listed patients. In all risk groups, transplantation was associated with a long-term survival advantage compared to dialysis, but there were marked differences in time to equal risk of death, and time to equal survival by donor type. For example, survival in high-risk recipients of an LD, SCD and ECD transplant became equal to that in similar risk wait-listed patients 130, 368 and 521 days after transplantation. Early posttransplant mortality risk is eliminated in low- and intermediate-risk patients, and markedly reduced in high-risk patients with LD transplantation. To inform decision making regarding transplantation in patients ≥ 65 years, we quantified the early posttransplant risk of death by determining the time to equal risk and equal survival between transplant recipients and wait-listed dialysis patients in the United States between 1995 and 2007 (total n = 25 468). Survival was determined using separate multivariate nonproportional hazards analyses in low-, intermediate- and high-risk cardiovascular risk patients. Compared to wait-listed patients with similar cardiovascular risk, standard criteria (SCD) and expanded criteria (ECD) recipients had a higher risk of death in the perioperative and early-posttransplant period. In contrast, low and intermediate risk living donor (LD) recipients had an immediate survival advantage compared to similar risk wait-listed patients. In all risk groups, transplantation was associated with a long-term survival advantage compared to dialysis, but there were marked differences in time to equal risk of death, and time to equal survival by donor type. For example, survival in high-risk recipients of an LD, SCD and ECD transplant became equal to that in similar risk wait-listed patients 130, 368 and 521 days after transplantation. Early posttransplant mortality risk is eliminated in low- and intermediate-risk patients, and markedly reduced in high-risk patients with LD transplantation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations110
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of TransplantationSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207