MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042328040 · doi:10.1177/2054358120941679

CSN COVID-19 Rapid Review Program: Management of Acute Kidney Injury

2020· article· en· W3042328040 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edward G. Clark, Swapnil Hiremath, Steven Soroka, Ron Wald, Matthew A. Weir, John Antonsen, Cheryl Banks, David A. Clark, Michael A. Copland, Sara N. Davison, Aviva Goldberg, Juliya Hemmett, Joanne Kappel, Jennifer M. MacRae, Fabrice Mac‐Way, Anna Mathew, Brendan McCormick, Louise Moist, Sarah Moran, Sanjay Pandeya, Elena Qirjazi, Krista Ryz, Rita S. Suri, Karthik Tennankore, Susan J. Thanabalasingam, Christine A. White, Deborah Zimmerman, Adeera Levin, Reem A. Mustafa, Gihad Nesrallah

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversitySt. Michael's HospitalOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNephrologyRenal replacement therapyAcute kidney injuryIntensive care unitIntensive care medicinePandemicKidney diseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Family medicineMedical emergencyInternal medicineDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Severe acute kidney injury (AKI) is a potential complication of COVID-19-associated critical illness. This has implications for the management of COVID-19-associated AKI and the resulting increased need for kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in the intensive care unit (ICU) and elsewhere in the hospital. The Canadian Society of Nephrology COVID-19 Rapid Review Team has sought to collate and synthesize currently available resources to inform ethically justifiable decisions. The goal is the provision of the best possible care for the largest number of patients with kidney disease while considering how best to ensure the safety of the health care team. INFORMATION SOURCES: Local, provincial, national, and international guidance and planning documents related to the COVID-19 pandemic; guidance documents available from nephrology and critical care-related professional organizations; recent journal articles and preprints related to the COVID-19 pandemic; expert opinion from nephrologists from across Canada. METHODS: A working group of kidney specialist physicians was established with representation from across Canada. Kidney physician specialists met via teleconference and exchanged e-mails to refine and agree on the proposed suggestions in this document. KEY FINDINGS: (1) Nephrology programs should work with ICU programs to plan for the possibility that up to 30% or more of critically ill patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICU will require kidney replacement therapy (KRT). (2) Specific suggestions pertinent to the optimal management of AKI and KRT in patients with COVID-19. These suggestions include, but are not limited to, aspects of fluid management, KRT vascular access, and KRT modality choice. (3) We describe considerations related to ensuring adequate provision of KRT, should resources become scarce during the COVID-19 pandemic. LIMITATIONS: A systematic review or meta-analysis was not conducted. Our suggestions have not been specifically evaluated in the clinical environment. The local context, including how the provision of acute KRT is organized, may impede the implementation of many suggestions. Knowledge is advancing rapidly in the area of COVID-19 and suggestions may become outdated quickly. IMPLICATIONS: Given that most acute KRT related to COVID-19 is likely to be required initially in the ICU setting, close collaboration and planning between critical care and nephrology programs is required. Suggestions may be updated as newer evidence becomes available.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.079
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.079
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.024

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and DiseaseSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207