MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326776307 · doi:10.1159/000444924

Novel Approach to Cardiovascular Outcome Prediction in Haemodialysis Patients

2016· article· en· W2326776307 on OpenAlexaff
Diana Chiu, Nik Abidin, Laura Johnstone, Michelle Chong, Vaidehi Kataria, Janet Sewell, Smeeta Sinha, Philip A. Kalra, Darren Green

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Nephrology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences Centre
FundersKidney Research UK
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicinePulse wave velocityArterial stiffnessEjection fractionHazard ratioProportional hazards modelHeart failureLeft ventricular hypertrophyHemodialysisBlood pressureConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular mortality is high in haemodialysis (HD) patients. Arterial stiffness and global longitudinal strain (GLS) are important non-atheromatous cardiovascular risk predictors. No study has encompassed both parameters in a combined model for prediction of outcomes in HD patients. This is important because left ventricular (LV) dysfunction can result from fibrotic remodelling secondary to increased arterial stiffness. METHODS: Two hundred and nineteen HD patients had pulse wave velocity (PWV) and echocardiography (including GLS) assessments. Patients were followed-up until death, transplantation or November 16, 2015, whichever happened first. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to determine factors associated with PWV and GLS. A multivariable Cox regression model investigated factors associated with all-cause, cardiac death and events. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety eight HD patients had full datasets (median age 64.2, 68.7% males) with a mean LV ejection fraction (LVEF) of 61.7 ± 10.1% and GLS -13.5 ± 3.3%; 51% had LV hypertrophy. Forty eight deaths (15 cardiac) and 44 major cardiac events occurred during a median follow-up of 27.6 (25th-75th percentile, 17.3-32.7) months. In separate survival models, PWV and GLS were independently associated with all-cause mortality; however, in a combined model, LV mass indexed to height2.7 (LVMI/HT2.7; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.04) and PWV (adjusted HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.03-1.47) were significant. PWV was neither associated with cardiac death nor associated with related cardiac events. However, GLS was associated with cardiac death (adjusted HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.00-1.54) and cardiac events (adjusted HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03-1.25). CONCLUSIONS: PWV and LVMI/HT2.7 were superior to GLS in prediction of all-cause mortality. However, GLS was associated with cardiac death and events even when accounting for LVEF and LVMI/HT2.7.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.485
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NephrologySame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207