MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2263770131 · doi:10.2188/jea.je20150077

Standardized Prevalence Ratios for Atrial Fibrillation in Adult Dialysis Patients in Japan

2016· article· en· W2263770131 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Epidemiology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceMinistry of Health, Labour and Welfare
KeywordsMedicineDialysisAtrial fibrillationPopulationInternal medicineConfidence intervalCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While it is assumed that dialysis patients in Japan have a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) than the general population, the magnitude of this difference is not known. METHODS: Standardized prevalence ratios (SPRs) for AF in dialysis patients (n = 1510) were calculated compared to data from the general population (n = 26 454) living in the same area. RESULTS: The prevalences of AF were 3.8% and 1.6% in dialysis patients and the general population, respectively. In male subjects, these respective values were 4.9% and 3.3%, and in female subjects they were 1.6% and 0.6%. The SPRs for AF were 2.53 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.88-3.19) in all dialysis patients, 1.80 (95% CI, 1.30-2.29) in male dialysis patients, and 2.13 (95% CI, 0.66-3.61) in female dialysis patients. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of AF in dialysis patients was twice that in the population-based controls. Since AF strongly contributes to a higher risk of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in the general population, further longitudinal studies should be conducted regarding the risk of several outcomes attributable to AF among Japanese dialysis patients.

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.

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)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.310 · 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