SP557SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE INCIDENCE OF SUDDEN CARDIAC DEATH IN ADULTS WITH END-STAGE RENAL DISEASE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and Aims: Although sudden cardiac death (SCD) is now recognized as a distinct cause of death in patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD), its incidence has not been well summarized. We aimed to systematically review the totality of evidence regarding the incidence of SCD among adults with ESRD on dialysis. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature based on a protocol developed a priori. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (inception to October 2013) for cohort studies reporting the incidence of SCD in adult patients with ESRD on hemo- or peritoneal dialysis. We collected data on number of SCD as well as the definition of SCD for each individual study. We used a random-effects model to summarize the incidence of SCD. We conducted subgroup analyses to explore for source of heterogeneity. Results: Twenty one studies (n=56,790 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The incidence of SCD among adults with ESRD ranged from 0.5 to 6.67 deaths per 100 person-years. The definitions and assessment of SCD varied across the included studies. There was evidence of significant heterogeneity (I2=98.2; p<0.001), which was not explained by subgroup analyses stratified by mean age, proportion of hypertensive or diabetic patients, follow-up time, study size, or type of cohort studied (population-based versus not).
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) | 0.001 | 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".