MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003516829 · doi:10.1111/ctr.13803

Impacts of center and clinical factors in antihypertensive medication use after kidney transplantation

2020· article· en· W3003516829 on OpenAlexaff
Farrukh M. Koraishy, Hala Yamout, Abhijit S. Naik, Zidong Zhang, Mark A. Schnitzler, Rosemary Ouseph, Ngan N. Lam, Vikas R. Dharnidharka, David A. Axelrod, Gregory P. Hess, Dorry L. Segev, Bertram L. Kasiske, Krista L. Lentine

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Transplantation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesHealth Resources and Services AdministrationMinneapolis Medical Research FoundationU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineThiazideDihydropyridineKidney transplantationPopulationOdds ratioTransplantationBlood pressureCalcium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypertension guidelines recommend calcium channel blockers (CCBs), thiazide diuretics, and angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEi/ARBs) as first-line agents to treat hypertension. Hypertension is common among kidney transplant (KTx) recipients, but data are limited regarding patterns of antihypertensive medication (AHM) use in this population. We examined a novel database that links national registry data for adult KTx recipients (age > 18 years) with AHM fill records from a pharmaceutical claims warehouse (2007-2016) to describe use and correlates of AHM use during months 7-12 post-transplant. For patients filling AHMs, individual agents used included: dihydropyridine (DHP) CCBs, 55.6%; beta-blockers (BBs), 52.8%; diuretics, 30.0%; ACEi/ARBs, 21.1%; non-DHP CCBs, 3.0%; and others, 20.1%. Both BB and ACEi/ARB use were significantly lower in the time period following the 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC-8) guidelines (2014-2016), compared with an earlier period (2007-2013). The median odds ratios generated from case-factor adjusted models supported variation in use of ACEi/ARBs (1.51) and BBs (1.55) across transplant centers. Contrary to hypertension guidelines for the general population, KTx recipients are prescribed relatively more BBs and fewer ACEi/ARBs. The clinical impact of this AHM prescribing pattern warrants further study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical TransplantationSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207