Lifetime Risk of ESRD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lifetime risk is the cumulative risk of experiencing an outcome between a disease-free index age and death. The lifetime risk of ESRD for a middle-aged individual is a relevant and easy to communicate measure of disease burden. We estimated lifetime risk of ESRD in a cohort of 2,895,521 adults without ESRD from 1997 to 2008. To estimate lifetime risk of ESRD by level of baseline kidney function, we analyzed a cohort of participants who had a serum creatinine measurement. We also estimated the sex- and index age-specific lifetime risk of incident ESRD and accounted for the competing risk of death. Among those individuals without ESRD at age 40 years, the lifetime risk of ESRD was 2.66% for men and 1.76% for women. The risk was higher in persons with reduced kidney function: for eGFR=44-59 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), the lifetime risk of ESRD was 7.51% for men and 3.21% for women, whereas men and women with relatively preserved kidney function (eGFR=60-89 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)) had lifetime risks of ESRD of 1.01% and 0.63%, respectively. The lifetime risk of ESRD was consistently higher for men at all ages and eGFR strata compared with women. In conclusion, approximately 1 in 40 men and 1 in 60 women of middle age will develop ESRD during their lifetimes (living into their 90s). These population-based estimates may assist individuals who make decisions regarding public health policy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".