MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094570595 · doi:10.1159/000188812

Stable Renal Function in Insulin-Dependent Diabetes mellitus 10 Years after Nephrotic Range Proteinuria

2008· article· en· W2094570595 on OpenAlexaff
M.H. Gault, David Esteva Fernández

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journals · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Diseases and Glomerulopathies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProteinuriaRenal functionInternal medicineNephropathyDiabetes mellitusDiabetic nephropathyNephrotic syndromeEndocrinologyRenal biopsyCreatinineRetinopathyUrologyGastroenterologyKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been considered unlikely that patients with insulin-dependent diabetes and diabetic nephropathy with nephrotic range proteinuria can substantially reduce proteinuria and continue for many years without further loss of renal function. We present a patient who had the diagnosis of insulin-dependent diabetes made at age 15, had his first of 6 laser treatments for proliferative and hemorrhagic retinopathy at age 27 and was found to have nephrotic range proteinuria and edema with hypertension at age 29, when results of a renal biopsy were typical of diabetic nephropathy. Ten years later, with the last 5.5 years on ACE inhibitors, proteinuria has been < 0.65 g/24 h for 2 years and recently 0.22 g, serum creatinine is unchanged at 90 to 102 mu mol/l, DTPA GFR is 104 ml/min and retinopathy has remained stable without laser therapy for 7 years. Blood pressure on clinic visits has averaged 126/74 for the last 8 years. This duration of stable renal function and the major decrease in proteinuria after being in the neprotic range is very rare in reports, if not unique.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journalsSame topicRenal Diseases and GlomerulopathiesFrench-language works237,207