MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2476148548 · doi:10.3389/fped.2016.00068

Assessment of Worldwide Acute Kidney Injury Epidemiology in Neonates: Design of a Retrospective Cohort Study

2016· article· en· W2476148548 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Jennifer G. Jetton, Ronnie Guillet, David J. Askenazi, Lynn Dill, Judd Jacobs, Alison L. Kent, David T. Selewski, Carolyn Abitbol, Fredrick J. Kaskel, Maroun J. Mhanna, Namasivayam Ambalavanan, Jennifer R. Charlton

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pediatrics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteUniversity of RochesterChildren's of AlabamaTexas Children's HospitalMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamUniversity of New MexicoCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical CenterNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesUniversity of Alabama
KeywordsMedicineAcute kidney injuryEpidemiologyRenal replacement therapyRetrospective cohort studyIntensive care medicineCohort studyNephrologyNeonatologyPediatricsCohortEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) affects ~30% of hospitalized neonates. Critical to advancing our understanding of neonatal AKI is collaborative research among neonatologists and nephrologists. The Neonatal Kidney Collaborative (NKC) is an international, multidisciplinary group dedicated to investigating neonatal AKI. The AWAKEN study (Assessment of Worldwide Acute Kidney injury Epidemiology in Neonates) was designed to describe the epidemiology of neonatal AKI, validate the definition of neonatal AKI, identify primary risk factors for neonatal AKI, and investigate the contribution of fluid management to AKI events and short-term outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The NKC was established with at least one pediatric nephrologist and neonatologist from 24 institutions in 4 countries (USA, Canada, Australia, and India). A Steering Committee and four subcommittees were created. The database subcommittee oversaw the development of the web-based database (MediData Rave™) that captured all NICU admissions from 1/1/14 to 3/31/14. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to eliminate neonates with a low likelihood of AKI. Data collection included: (1) baseline demographic information; (2) daily physiologic parameters and care received during the first week of life; (3) weekly "snapshots"; (4) discharge information including growth parameters, final diagnoses, discharge medications, and need for renal replacement therapy; and (5) all serum creatinine values. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: AWAKEN was proposed as human subjects research. The study design allowed for a waiver of informed consent/parental permission. NKC investigators will disseminate data through peer-reviewed publications and educational conferences. DISCUSSION: The purpose of this publication is to describe the formation of the NKC, the establishment of the AWAKEN cohort and database, future directions, and a few "lessons learned." The AWAKEN database includes ~325 unique variables and >4 million discrete data points. AWAKEN will be the largest, most inclusive neonatal AKI study to date. In addition to validating the neonatal AKI definition and identifying risk factors for AKI, this study will uncover variations in practice patterns related to fluid provision, renal function monitoring, and involvement of pediatric nephrologists during hospitalization. The AWAKEN study will position the NKC to achieve the long-term goal of improving the lives, health, and well-being of newborns at risk for kidney disease.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations131
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PediatricsSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207