Nephrology consultation and kidney failure in people with stage 4 chronic kidney disease: a population-based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Guidelines recommend referral for nephrology consultation for people with severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) to improve care and renal outcomes, yet the advocated benefits of nephrology referral on CKD progression in this patient population are unclear. Methods We linked laboratory and administrative data in Alberta, Canada to identify adults with stage 4 CKD between 2002 and 2014 (follow-up end on March 31, 2017). We studied the association between time-varying receipt of outpatient nephrology consultation and kidney failure (the earlier of renal replacement initiation or eGFR < 10 mL/min/1.73 m2 for more than 3 months), accounting for the competing risk of death. Results Of the 14,382 participants, 41% were ≥ 85 years old, 33% saw a nephrologist as an outpatient, 9% developed kidney failure, and 53% died over a median of 2.6 years. Compared with people who did not see a nephrologist before or at 7 months (median time to consultation), those who did were more likely to develop kidney failure [5-year risk (95% CI) 0.23 (0.21–0.24) vs 0.07 (0.065–0.075)]. With increasing age or higher eGFR, the 5-year risk of kidney failure became progressively smaller, from 0.24 (0.18–0.29) at age < 65 to 0.01 (0.006–0.015) at age ≥ 85 years and from 0.21 (0.18–0.23) at eGFR 15–19 to 0.066 (0.060–0.072) at eGFR 25–29 mL/min/1.73 m2; yet, the hazard ratio of kidney failure (1.6–4.3) increased following nephrology consultation in people who were older or had higher eGFR. Conclusions Adults with stage 4 CKD who see a nephrologist are more likely to develop kidney failure than those who don’t, especially within lower absolute risk categories. Although selective referral may explain these findings, there is no evidence of an association between nephrology care and reduced risk of kidney failure in people with severe CKD. Studies are needed to assess the benefits of nephrology consultation in people with moderate 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".