Susceptibility to Insulin Resistance after Kidney Donation: A Pilot Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In chronic kidney disease the contribution of decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR) versus enhanced inflammation to cause insulin resistance (IR) is controversial. AIM: This pilot observational study examines, therefore, the prevalence of IR after kidney donation and factors that may determine its level. METHODS: Insulin, proinsulin, adiponectin, malondialdehyde, and hsCRP were measured by conventional techniques in 14 previous kidney donors and 25 healthy volunteers. RESULTS: Estimated GFR from Cockcroft-Gault formula of 76.42 + or - 19.39 ml/min/1.73 m(2) in the nephrectomized group was significantly lower (p < 0.01) than that in the control group of 125 + or - 32.9 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Fasting serum insulin of 16.57 + or - 16.86 mU/l and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) of 4.86 + or - 5.11 in the nephrectomized group were significantly higher (p < 0.01) than the insulin level of 6.02 + or - 4.06 mU/l and HOMA-IR of 1.5 + or - 1.06 in the control group. There was no significant difference in levels in inflammatory mediators between the two groups. None of the tested inflammatory mediators correlated significantly with IR. CONCLUSION: Reduced GFR alone in previous kidney donors is associated with increased IR.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".