MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988582819 · doi:10.1002/pds.1923

Predicting the risk of hyperkalemia in patients with chronic kidney disease starting lisinopril

2010· article· en· W1988582819 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPotassium and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesOregon Clinical and Translational Research InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsHyperkalemiaMedicineLisinoprilKidney diseaseInternal medicineRenal functionRetrospective cohort studyProportional hazards modelDiabetes mellitusAngiotensin-converting enzymeEndocrinologyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are recommended for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) because they slow disease progression. But physicians' concerns about the risk of hyperkalemia (elevated serum potassium level), a potentially fatal adverse effect, may limit optimal management with ACE-inhibitors. We synthesized known predictors of hyperkalemia into a prognostic risk score to predict the risk of hyperkalemia. METHODS: We assembled a retrospective cohort of adult patients with possible CKD (at least one estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) value less than 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) who started an ACE-inhibitor (i.e., incident users) between 1998 and 2006 at a health maintenance organization. We followed patients for hyperkalemia: (1) potassium value >5.5 mmol/L; or (2) diagnosis code for hyperkalemia. Cox regression synthesized a priori predictors recorded in the electronic medical record into a risk score. RESULTS: We followed 5171 patients and 145 experienced hyperkalemia, a 90-day risk of 2.8%. Predictors included: age, eGFR, diabetes, heart failure, potassium supplements, potassium-sparing diuretics, and a high dose for the ACE-inhibitor (lisinopril). The risk score separated high-risk patients (top quintile, observed risk of 6.9%) from low-risk patients (bottom quintile, observed risk of 0.7%). Predicted and observed risks agreed within 1% for each quintile. The risk increased gradually in relation to declining eGFR with no apparent threshold for contraindicating ACE-inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: The risk score separated high-risk patients (who may need more intensive laboratory monitoring) from low-risk patients. The risk score should be validated in other populations before it is ready for use in clinical practice.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.252 · 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