MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2528072467

Original Investigation CKD Stage at Nephrology Referral and Factors Influencing the Risks of ESRD and Death

2014· article· en· W2528072467 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maneesh Sud, Navdeep Tangri, Adeera Levin, Melania Pintilie, Andrew S. Levey, David Naimark

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNephrologyKidney diseaseEnd stage renal diseaseReferralDialysisInternal medicineCohortKidney transplantationStage (stratigraphy)TransplantationRetrospective cohort studyRenal replacement therapyCohort studyIntensive care medicineHemodialysisFamily medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 3-5 are at increased risk of progressing to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) or dying prior to the development of ESRD compared with patients with less severe CKD. The magnitude of these risks may vary by stage, which has important implications for therapy. Our objective was to apply a competing risk analysis in order to estimate these risks in a referred cohort of patients with CKD by stage at referral and identify risk factors associated with each outcome. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting & Participants: 3,273 patients with CKD stages 3-5 who were referred to the nephrology clinic at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, prior to December 31, 2008, with follow-up data available prior to December 31, 2008. Predictors: CKD stage at time of referral; demographic, laboratory, and clinical characteristics. Outcomes: ESRD, defined as the initiation of dialysis therapy or pre-emptive kidney transplantation, and death from any cause prior to ESRD. Measurements: Baseline laboratory data. Results: Over a median follow-up of 2.98 years, 459 patients (14%) developed ESRD and 540 (16%) died. Rates per 100 patient-years of ESRD versus death prior to ESRD for CKD stage 3A were 0.6 (95% CI, 0.1-1.0) versus 2.2 (95% CI, 1.2-3.1; P , 0.001); for CKD stage 3B, 1.4 (95% CI, 0.8-2.1) versus 4.4 (95% CI, 3.3-5.6; P , 0.001); for CKD stage 4, 7.7 (95% CI, 5.9-9.4) versus 8.0 (95% CI, 6.2-9.8; P 5 0.6); and for CKD stage 5, 41.4 (95% CI, 34.4-48.4) versus 9.4 (95% CI, 5.2-13.4; P , 0.001). For those with CKD stage 4, we identified 12 variables associated with higher risk of ESRD and 7 variables associated with higher risk of death prior to ESRD. Limitations: A cohort analyzed retrospectively. Conclusions: ESRD and death prior to ESRD incidence was most similar in CKD stage 4. We identified variables easily assessed at the time of referral that could discriminate between these risks. Am J Kidney Dis. 63(6):928-936. a 2014 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→