Does an Association Exist Between Pseudoexfoliation Syndrome and Chronic Kidney Disease?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether pseudoexfoliation (PEX) syndrome is associated with an increased risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 271 consecutive patients were recruited into 3 study groups---PEX syndrome (n=86), primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) (n=91), and nonglaucoma controls (n=94)---and underwent serum creatinine testing to determine their glomerular filtration rates (eGFR). Repeat eGFR and testing for urine albumin:creatinine ratio were performed a minimum of 3 months later if the initial eGFR was less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m. CKD was diagnosed if both eGFR levels were less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m or both eGFR levels were less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m and the urine albumin:creatinine ratio was greater than 2.0. The main outcome measure was the rate of CKD for each group. RESULTS: The CKD rate for the control group (11.7%, 11 of 94) was statistically higher than the PEX (3.5%, 3 of 86, P=0.050) and the POAG (3.3%, 3 of 91, P=0.049) groups. However, there was a significantly higher rate of diabetes mellitus, a known risk factor for CKD, in the control group than the PEX and POAG groups. After adjusting for the differences in the rate of diabetes mellitus and mean age (another risk factor for CKD) between groups, a multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that none of the study groups was a predictor of an increased rate of CKD. A post-hoc analysis performed with all patients with diabetes mellitus removed also showed no statistical difference between groups for CKD rates and mean eGFR levels. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with age-matched patients with POAG and nonglaucoma controls, PEX syndrome was not found to be associated with an increased prevalence of CKD.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".