MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160112939 · doi:10.3109/10641950902968676

Monitoring Renal Function in Hypertensive Pregnancy

2009· article· en· W2160112939 on OpenAlexafffund
Anne‐Marie Côté, Elaine Lam, Peter von Dadelszen, André Mattman, Laura A. Magee

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension in Pregnancy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineRenal functionUrologyPregnancyIntraclass correlationCreatininePreeclampsiaObstetricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: In hypertensive pregnancy, to compare 24hr creatinine clearance (CrCl) with formulae-derived renal function (Cockcroft-Gault (CG) or Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD)). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review (198 women, 63% preeclampsia) using paired t-test (significant p < 0.008) and intraclass correlation coefficients (acceptable >0.70) to compare 24hr and CG CrCl. The 24hr CrCl was compared with each of the CG and MDRD formulae by Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: For 24hr CrCl, uncorrected values were similar to corrected using pre-pregnancy weight (p = 0.04); other weights gave consistently different CrCl (p < 0.0001). Limits of agreement were wide when CG and MDRD formulae were compared with 24hr CrCl. Compared with 24hr CrCl, MDRD estimates were consistently lower, and CG CrCl higher (current weight) or lower (pre-pregnancy or lean weight). CONCLUSION: MDRD and CG formulae should not be used in hypertensive pregnancy. Use of serum creatinine is advocated. If 24hr CrCl is performed, any correction should utilize pre-pregnancy weight. Neither the Cockcroft-Gault nor Modified Diet in Renal Disease formulae for glomerular filtration rate estimation are alternatives to 24hr creatinine clearance in hypertensive pregnancy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations18
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertension in PregnancySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207