MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Timely referral to the nephrologist: Essential to optimizing patient outcomes

2004· article· en· W1967880379 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Władysław Sułowicz, Tomasz Stompór

Bibliographic record

VenueHemodialysis International · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralNephrologyIntensive care medicineRenal replacement therapyDialysisEnd stage renal diseaseKidney diseaseDiseaseHemodialysisUremiaInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annual mortality on renal replacement therapy is about 10% in Western Europe and reaches 20% in the United States. The reasons responsible for this excess mortality include among others advanced age, high prevalence of diabetes and comorbid conditions, susceptibility to infections, and cancer. An additional cause that should be considered is late referral to overall renal care and for renal replacement therapy. It has been demonstrated recently that early referral may provide many advantages for the patient, such as prevention of organ damage secondary to uremia and even delay the onset of end-stage renal disease. These benefits prompted numerous recommendations for timely referral, both for dialysis and for long-term renal follow-up. Despite available guidelines for nephrology referral the current practice is still suboptimal, resulting in delayed initiation of dialysis and clinical outcomes that are not ideal. There is an urgent need in the renal community to change the current practice of referral. Beyond the benefits for patients, society may also expect potential cost effectiveness from early renal care.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.290
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemodialysis International→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→