Prevalence estimates of chronic kidney disease in Canada: results of a nationally representative survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease is an important risk factor for death and cardiovascular-related morbidity, but estimates to date of its prevalence in Canada have generally been extrapolated from the prevalence of end-stage renal disease. We used direct measures of kidney function collected from a nationally representative survey population to estimate the prevalence of chronic kidney disease among Canadian adults. METHODS: We examined data for 3689 adult participants of cycle 1 of the Canadian Health Measures Survey (2007-2009) for the presence of chronic kidney disease. We also calculated the age-standardized prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors by chronic kidney disease group. We cross-tabulated the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) with albuminuria status. RESULTS: The prevalence of chronic kidney disease during the period 2007-2009 was 12.5%, representing about 3 million Canadian adults. The estimated prevalence of stage 3-5 disease was 3.1% (0.73 million adults) and albuminuria 10.3% (2.4 million adults). The prevalence of diabetes, hypertension and hypertriglyceridemia were all significantly higher among adults with chronic kidney disease than among those without it. The prevalence of albuminuria was high, even among those whose eGFR was 90 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) or greater (10.1%) and those without diabetes or hypertension (9.3%). Awareness of kidney dysfunction among adults with stage 3-5 chronic kidney disease was low (12.0%). INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of kidney dysfunction was substantial in the survey population, including individuals without hypertension or diabetes, conditions most likely to prompt screening for kidney dysfunction. These findings highlight the potential for missed opportunities for early intervention and secondary prevention of chronic kidney disease.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".