MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106367190 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-76929-y

Acute kidney injury risk in orthopaedic trauma patients pre and post surgery using a biomarker algorithm and clinical risk score

2020· article· en· W3106367190 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mary Jo Kurth, William T. McBride, Gavin McLean, Joanne Watt, Anna Domanska, John Lamont, Daniel Maguire, Peter Fitzgerald, Mark W. Ruddock

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsMedicineBiomarkerAcute kidney injuryOrthopedic surgeryProspective cohort studyIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute kidney injury (AKI) after major trauma is associated with increased mortality. The aim of this study was to assess if measurement of blood biomarkers in combination with clinical characteristics could be used to develop a tool to assist clinicians in identifying which orthopaedic trauma patients are at risk of AKI. This is a prospective study of 237 orthopaedic trauma patients who were consecutively scheduled for open reduction and internal fixation of their fracture between May 2012 and August 2013. Clinical characteristics were recorded, and 28 biomarkers were analysed in patient blood samples. Post operatively a combination of H-FABP, sTNFR1 and MK had the highest predictive ability to identify patients at risk of developing AKI (AUROC 0.885). Three clinical characteristics; age, dementia and hypertension were identified in the orthopaedic trauma patients as potential risks for the development of AKI. Combining biomarker data with clinical characteristics allowed us to develop a proactive AKI clinical tool, which grouped patients into four risk categories that were associated with a clinical management regime that impacted patient care, management, length of hospital stay, and efficient use of hospital resources.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207