Can Cystatin C Replace Creatinine to Estimate Glomerular Filtration Rate? A Literature Review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the increasing knowledge that estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) from serum creatinine (Scr) has limited value, researchers have developed new equations based on serum cystatin C (Cys C). AIM: To compare the performance of serum Cys C and Cys C-based GFR equations to Scr and Scr-based GFR equations. METHODS: A Medline literature search for studies in English. RESULTS: Fourteen studies in kidney transplant patients and 29 in patients with native kidney disease were identified. 70% of studies on transplants favored Cys C over Scr while 60% favored serum Cys C over Scr in patients with native kidney disease. Three studies in transplant patients and 6 in patients with native kidney disease compared the performances of Cys C- and Scr-based equations. 70% of the studies performed on transplantation favored Cys C, while 85% the studies performed in native kidney diseases showed superiority of Cys C-based equations. CONCLUSION: A large number of studies favor Cys C over Scr for the estimation of GFR. Still, many reports show no superiority of Cys C over Scr. Consistent with this, more studies are needed to study the performance of Cys C-based GFR equations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it