Survival of patients from South Asian and Black populations starting renal replacement therapy in England and Wales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: South Asian and Black ethnic minorities in the UK have higher rates of acceptance onto renal replacement therapy (RRT) than Caucasians. Registry studies in the USA and Canada show better survival; there are few data in the UK. METHODS: Renal Association UK Renal Registry data were used to compare the characteristics and survival of patients starting RRT from both groups with those of Caucasians, using incident cases accepted between 1997 and 2006. Survival was analysed by multivariate Cox's proportional hazards regression split by haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis (PD) due to non-proportionality, and without censoring at transplantation. RESULTS: A total of 2495 (8.2%) were South Asian and 1218 (4.0%) were Black. They were younger and had more diabetic nephropathy. The age-adjusted prevalence of vascular co-morbidity was higher in South Asians and lower in Blacks; other co-morbidities were generally common in Caucasians. Late referral did not differ. They were less likely to receive a transplant or to start PD. South Asians and Blacks had significantly better survival than Caucasians both from RRT start to Day 90 and after Day 90, and for those on HD or PD at Day 90. Fully adjusted hazard ratios after Day 90 on haemodialysis were 0.70 (0.55-0.89) for South Asians and 0.56 (0.41-0.75) for Blacks. CONCLUSION: South Asian and Black minorities have better survival on dialysis. An understanding of the mechanisms may provide general insights for all patients on RRT.
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".