Red cell distribution width associations with clinical outcomes: A population-based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Higher levels of red cell distribution width (RDW) are associated with adverse outcomes, especially in selected cohorts with or at risk for chronic disease. Whether higher RDW or the related parameter standard deviation of the red blood cell distribution (SD-RBC) can predict a broader range of outcomes in the general population is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of RDW and SD-RBC with the risk of adverse outcomes in people from the general population. DESIGN: Population-based retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Health care system in a Canadian province (Alberta). PARTICIPANTS: All 3,156,863 adults living in Alberta, Canada with at least one measure of RDW and SD-RBC between 2003 and 2016. Data were analyzed in September 2018. EXPOSURE: RDW and SD-RBC, classified into percentiles (<1, 1-5, 5-25, 25-75, 75-95, 95-99, >99). MAIN OUTCOMES: All-cause death, first myocardial infarction, first stroke or transient ischemic attack, placement into long-term care (LTC), progression to renal replacement therapy (initiation of chronic dialysis or pre-emptive kidney transplantation), incident solid malignancy, and first hospitalization during follow-up. RESULTS: Over median follow-up of 6.8 years, 209,991 of 3,156,863 participants (6.7%) died. The risk of death increased with increasing RDW percentile. After adjustment, and compared to RDW in the 25th to 75th percentiles, the risk of death was lower for participants in the <25th percentiles but higher for participants in the 75th-95th percentiles (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.40,1.43), the 95th-99th percentiles (HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.83,1.89) and the >99th percentile (HR 2.18, 95% CI 2.12,2.23). Similar results were observed for MI, stroke/TIA, incident cancer, hospitalization and LTC placement, but no association was found between RDW and ESRD. Findings were generally similar for SD-RBC, except that all associations tended to be stronger than for RDW, and both lower and higher values of SD-RBC were independently associated with ESRD. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: RDW and SD-RBC may be useful as prognostic markers for people in the general population, especially for outcomes related to chronic illness. SD-RBC may be superior to RDW.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".