MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797393778 · doi:10.1093/jbcr/iry006.125

202 Risk Factors and Outcomes of Renal Injury in Patients with a Major Burn: An Historical Cohort Study

2018· article· en· W2797393778 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Demsey, Alexa Mordhorst, Donald Griesdale, Anthony Papp

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortAcute kidney injuryRenal replacement therapyIntensive care unitCohort studyInternal medicineBurn centerEmergency medicineRetrospective cohort studyMedical recordKidney diseaseIntensive care medicineMortality ratePoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Renal failure in major burn patients is associated with high mortality, reported at up to 80% in recent literature. Quality Improvement work at our center suggests recent mortality in this cohort is lower than reported. Our paper investigates the associated factors and mortality rate in major burn patients with AKI. We performed a historical cohort study of burn patients admitted to our Intensive Care Unit between 2010 and 2016. Patients were excluded if there was prior history of kidney disease. Data was collected from patient charts, electronic medical records, and the ICU research database. Baseline and demographic information, as well as laboratory and clinical information regarding course and management in hospital was collected. We used multiple fractional polynomial regression to model the association between risk factors and the development of AKI. Of the 151 patients included, 64 people develop AKI (42%) as defined by the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) criteria with the following stages: AKIN stage 1 (33 of 151 [22%]), AKIN stage 2 (11 of 151 [7%]) and AKIN stage 3 (20 of 151 [13%]).Of these, 27 patients required renal replacement therapy (RRT). On multivariable regression, age per 10 year increase (OR 1.8, 95%CI: 1.2 - 2.5), APACHE II score (OR 1.2, 95%CI: 1.1 - 1.3), and TBSA% (log TBSA OR 2.7, 95% CI: 1.5 - 4.7) were all associated with the risk of developing AKI. The relationship between TBSA and development of AKI was found to have a logarithmic association (see figure). Major burn injury patients who develop AKI in our cohort had a significantly lower mortality than that reported in the literature. Additionally, we identify a potential new relationship between TBSA% and risk of AKI development, following a logarithmic pattern with highest increase in risk for a given increase in TBSA occurring before 30% TBSA. This could change the estimation of prognosis of patients with major burns who develop renal failure.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207