MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982566100 · doi:10.1097/mcc.0b013e328317ee6e

Renal recovery following acute kidney injury

2008· review· en· W1982566100 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Etienne Macedo, Josée Bouchard, Ravindra L. Mehta

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Critical Care · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKidney Foundation of CanadaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoInternational Society of Nephrology
KeywordsMedicineAcute kidney injuryDialysisIntensive care medicineKidney diseaseRenal replacement therapyNephrologyEnd stage renal diseaseEpidemiologyPopulationIncidence (geometry)DiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Renal recovery after acute kidney injury (AKI) is an important outcome, most commonly defined as dialysis independence at hospital discharge. This review focuses on the epidemiology of renal recovery after AKI and provides a framework for determining the relationship of a lack of renal recovery and subsequent outcomes including the development of chronic kidney disease. RECENT FINDINGS: The majority of studies addressing renal recovery includes only critically ill patients requiring dialysis and considers renal recovery as dialysis independency at hospital discharge. However, a significant proportion of AKI patients are not in the ICU, are not dialyzed, and may require alternate definitions for assessing renal recovery. There is emerging evidence that an AKI episode can lead to chronic kidney disease and can accelerate the progression to end stage renal disease. Patients that survive after AKI present a higher long-term mortality risk, especially those with partial renal recovery. SUMMARY: Patients with incomplete renal recovery after AKI are underrepresented in most epidemiologic studies and the precise effect on the incidence and prevalence of end stage renal disease population has yet to be determined. A standardized definition for renal recovery is needed and the influence of an AKI episode on long-term outcomes needs to be better evaluated.

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)0.004
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations129
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Critical CareSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207