International comparison of trends in patients commencing renal replacement therapy by primary renal disease
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To examine international time trends in the incidence of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) by primary renal disease (PRD). METHODS: Renal registries reporting on patients starting RRT per million population for ESRD by PRD from 2005 to 2014, were identified by internet search and literature review. The average annual percentage change (AAPC) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of the time trends was computed using Joinpoint regression. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in the incidence of RRT for ESRD due to diabetes mellitus (DM) in Europe (AAPC = -0.9; 95%CI -1.3; -0.5) and to hypertension/renal vascular disease (HT/RVD) in Australia (AAPC = -1.8; 95%CI -3.3; -0.3), Canada (AAPC = -2.9; 95%CI -4.4; -1.5) and Europe (AAPC = -1.1; 95%CI -2.1; -0.0). A decrease or stabilization was observed for glomerulonephritis in all regions and for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) in all regions except for Malaysia and the Republic of Korea. An increase of 5.2-16.3% was observed for DM, HT/RVD and ADPKD in Malaysia and the Republic of Korea. CONCLUSION: Large international differences exist in the trends in incidence of RRT by primary renal disease. Mapping of these international trends is the first step in defining the causes and successful preventative measures of CKD.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 it