MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Complications of chronic kidney disease in children post‐renal transplantation – A single center experience

2007· article· en· W1968203301 on OpenAlexaff
Hubert Wong, Pavel Geier, Bushra Chaudry, Guido Filler

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Transplantation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreAgricultural Research Institute of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePrednisoneSingle CenterCalcineurinGastroenterologyInternal medicineKidney diseaseTransplantationAnemiaUrologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Similar to adults, CKD may persist after pediatric RTx. Clinical and laboratory parameters were analyzed retrospectively in 23 RTx recipients (13 males, age 11.9 +/- 5.2 yr), initially treated with prednisone, calcineurin inhibitor (TAC = 18, cyclosporine neoral = 5), and MMF at four months post-RTx (T1) and at 3.4 +/- 2.8 yr post-RTx (T2). Mean (+/-s.d.) cystatin C GFR (mL/min/1.73 m(2)) was 72 +/- 19 at T1 and 70 +/- 22 at T2 (NS). At T2, CKD stage I was present in five patients (22%), stage II in eight patients (35%), and stage III in 10 patients (43%). At T2, calcineurin inhibitors were utilized in 19, MMF in 13, and SIR in 13 patients. The prevalence of hypertension was 69% at T1 and 87% at T2 (p = NS). Anemia was diagnosed in 61% at T1 and 69% at T2 with average therapeutic MMF (2.78 +/- 1.3 mg/mL) and SIR (7.62 +/- 2.3 mg/mL) trough levels. Hypercholesterolemia was detected in 44.0% at T1 and 47% at T2. Bone disease was diagnosed in 26.0% at T1 and 21.7% at T2. Mean height Z-scores were -1.0 +/- 1.2 (T1) and -1.0 +/- 1.59 (T2, NS), with 21% at T1 and 30% at T2 below two SDS. We observed suboptimal growth, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, bone disease, and anemia in a significant proportion of transplanted children.

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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations32
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric TransplantationSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207