MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084215097 · doi:10.1111/petr.12381

Value of serum cystatin <scp>C</scp> in estimating renal function in children with non‐renal solid organ transplantation

2014· article· en· W2084215097 on OpenAlexaff
Manjula Gowrishankar, Christina VanderPluym, Cheri Robert, Fiona Bamforth, Susan Gilmour, Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Transplantation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenal functionCystatin CCreatinineUrologyTransplantationKidney transplantationInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children with non-renal solid organ transplants are surviving longer, but outcome is complicated by CKD. Accurate and frequent renal function monitoring is imperative to recognize and institute measures early to reverse, prevent, or arrest progression. This study of 59 children determined the accuracy (P30), bias, sensitivity and specificity between measured renal function by NM-GFR, and estimated GFR by three formulas: Filler (serum cystatin C), mSchwartz (serum creatinine), and CKiD (serum cystatin C, creatinine, urea, and height). Mean GFR by all formulas differed significantly from NM-GFR. Filler and mSchwartz formulas significantly increased the proportion of patients with GFR ≥ 90 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (CKD stage 1) while decreasing those with GFR 60-89 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (CKD stage 2). All formulas overestimated GFR. CKiD showed the highest P30 and lowest bias (79.7%; 6.9 mL/min/1.73 m(2) ) followed by Filler (67.7%; 19.9 mL/min/1.73 m(2) ) and Schwartz (57.6%; 26.8 mL/min/1.73 m(2) ) for all GFR values. All formulas performed best with GFR ≥ 90 mL/min/1.73 m(2) , but CKiD was the only formula to achieve 91.1% accuracy. All formulas showed high sensitivities, but low specificities at NM-GFR cutoff at 90. Thus, GFR estimated by CKiD followed by Filler formula is an adequate method to monitor renal function closely and frequently in these children.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric TransplantationSame topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207