MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109062197 · doi:10.1016/j.xkme.2020.09.013

Dialysis Initiation and All-Cause Mortality Among Incident Adult Patients With Advanced CKD: A Meta-analysis With Bias Analysis

2020· article· en· W3109062197 on OpenAlexaff
Rui Fu, Nigar Sekercioglu, Maya B. Mathur, Rachel Couban, Peter C. Coyte

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsImpactMcMaster UniversityPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfoundingDialysisMeta-analysisInternal medicineObservational studyKidney diseaseSubgroup analysisCohort studyProportional hazards modelProspective cohort studySurvival analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVES: Due to unmeasured confounding, observational studies have limitations when assessing whether dialysis initiation reduces mortality compared with conservative therapy among adults with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). We addressed this issue in this meta-analysis. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis with bias analysis for unmeasured confounding. SETTING & STUDY POPULATION: Adults with stage 4 or 5 CKD who had initiated dialysis or conservative treatment. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: Prospective or retrospective cohort studies comparing survival of dialysis versus conservatively managed patients were searched on MEDLINE and Embase from January 2009 to March 20, 2019. DATA EXTRACTION: HRs of all-cause mortality associated with dialysis initiation compared with conservative treatment. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We pooled HRs using a random-effects model. We estimated the percentage of effect sizes more protective than HRs of 0.80 and severity of unmeasured confounding that could reduce this percentage to only 10%. Subgroup analysis was performed for studies with only older patients (aged ≥ 65 years). RESULTS: 12 studies were included that involved 16,609 dialysis patients and 3,691 conservatively managed patients. A random-effects model suggested that dialysis initiation was associated with a mean mortality HR of 0.47 (95% CI, 0.34-0.64), in which 92% (95% CI, 50%-100%) of the true effects were more protective than HRs of 0.80. To reduce the percentage of HRs < 0.80 to 10%, unmeasured confounder(s) would need to be associated with both dialysis initiation and mortality by relative risks of 4.05 (95% CI, 2.39-4.15), which is equivalent to shifting each study's estimated HR by 2.31-fold (95% CI, 1.51-2.36). Restricting studies to include only older patients did not modify the results. LIMITATIONS: Limited number of studies and evidence on the absence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that dialysis initiation considerably reduces mortality among adults with advanced CKD. Future bias-adjusted meta-analyses need to assess outcomes beyond mortality.

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.071
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKidney MedicineSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207