MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117600602 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfs303

Introduction and context: the past, present and future of CKD research

2012· article· en· W2117600602 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Locatelli, Anna S. Levin

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContext (archaeology)Intensive care medicineArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and its progression to the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) are important causes of distress for patients and their families, but also a very important economic and logistic burden for society. Even more importantly, a great majority of CKD patients die due to cardiovascular disease (CVD) before reaching the need for RRT. Thus, nephrologists should focus their efforts not only on preventing or at least delaying CKD progression, but also in reducing the risk of CVD. Unfortunately, CKD is not a homogeneous disease and its progression varies considerably, even among patients with the same underlying disease and the same level of renal function, making its therapeutic approach more and more complicated. This complexity in outcomes has led to vigorous efforts of groups of outstanding nephrologists and their collaborators working within the realm of basic science, clinical research and knowledge translation. The high impact that CKD and its complications have on organizational and economic systems has prompted enquiry into all aspects of care delivery from screening to multidisciplinary care.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0150.014
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0090.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207