MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2218584580 · doi:10.1159/000441425

Guidelines for Classification of Acute Kidney Diseases and Disorders

2015· article· en· W2218584580 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca Barry, Matthew T. James

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journals · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKidney diseaseIntensive care medicineAcute kidney injuryGuidelineClinical PracticeKidney disorderRenal functionNephrologyDiseaseKidneyInternal medicinePathologyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent efforts have standardized definitions and classification systems for acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). These efforts have enhanced communication, recognition, and awareness of acute and CKDs and stimulated research on both disorders. However, abnormalities of kidney function and structure can occur that do not meet the current criteria for either disorder. Recognizing the need for a uniform approach encompassing both acute and chronic abnormalities of kidney function and structure, the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes 2012 Clinical Practice Guideline for AKI Guidelines proposed an operational definition for acute kidney diseases and disorders (AKD) that encompasses both AKI and any newly recognized kidney disease that does not meet the current definitions for AKI or CKD. Recent commentaries have highlighted that it may be premature to adopt these criteria into clinical practice, but that they may be useful for application in epidemiologic studies. Future research is needed to better understand the clinical characteristics, incidence, and prognosis of AKD, as well as the implications of case identification based on the AKD criteria.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations38
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journalsSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207