Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anaemia is recognized as a common complication of chronic kidney disease with significant associated morbidity and mortality. Published data document the negative impact of anaemia on cardiovascular disease outcomes, progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD), hospitalizations, rehabilitation and quality of life, among others. Gender differences have been identified in many of these areas as well as, and importantly, in cardiovascular and chronic kidney disease outcomes. Female gender is associated with lower risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality as well as slower progression of chronic kidney disease. Interestingly, there are some well-described physiological adaptations to anaemia in women, which include shifting of the haemoglobin oxygen dissociation curve to reduce oxygen affinity secondary to higher levels of 2,3-diphosphoglycerate. However, the complex physiology underlying the impact of anaemia or gender on patients with chronic kidney disease is not well-characterized to date. Furthermore, there has been little examination of the potential interaction between anaemia and gender on cardiac or kidney outcomes. In this paper, we review the documented impact of anaemia and gender on outcomes, and explore the interaction of anaemia and gender in patients with CKD. We also present data that describe the potential importance of considering gender when targeting specific levels of haemoglobin. The value of a new perspective on haemoglobin and gender in kidney disease is important from both a physiological and an economical perspective.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".