MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115217873 · doi:10.1016/j.ekir.2020.12.020

An Evaluation of Commonly Used Surrogate Baseline Creatinine Values to Classify AKI During Acute Infection

2020· article· en· W3115217873 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel J Cooper, Katherine Plewes, Matthew J. Grigg, Aatish Patel, Giri Shan Rajahram, Timothy William, Thomas F. Hiemstra, Zhiqiang Wang, Bridget E. Barber, Nicholas M. Anstey

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney International Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthMichael Smith Health Research BCMedical Research CouncilAustralian Government
KeywordsMedicineCreatinineRenal functionKidney diseaseIncidence (geometry)Acute kidney injuryUrologyReceiver operating characteristicCohortInternal medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Classification of acute kidney injury (AKI) requires a premorbid baseline creatinine, often unavailable in studies in acute infection. METHODS: We evaluated commonly used surrogate and imputed baseline creatinine values against a "reference" creatinine measured during follow-up in an adult clinical trial cohort. Known AKI incidence (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes [KDIGO] criteria) was compared with AKI incidence classified by (1) back-calculation using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation with and without a Chinese ethnicity correction coefficient; (2) back-calculation using the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation; (3) assigning glomerular filtration rate (GFR) from age and sex-standardized reference tables; and (4) lowest measured creatinine during admission. Back-calculated distributions were performed using GFRs of 75 and 100 ml/min. RESULTS: All equations using an assumed GFR of 75 ml/min underestimated AKI incidence by more than 50%. Back-calculation with CKD-EPI and GFR of 100 ml/min most accurately predicted AKI but misclassified all AKI stages and had low levels of agreement with true AKI diagnoses. Back-calculation using MDRD and assumed GFR of 100 ml/min, age and sex-reference GFR values adjusted for good health, and lowest creatinine during admission performed similarly, best predicting AKI incidence (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves [AUC ROCs] of 0.85, 0.87, and 0.85, respectively). MDRD back-calculation using a cohort mean GFR showed low total error (22%) and an AUC ROC of 0.85. CONCLUSION: Current methods for estimating baseline creatinine are large sources of potential error in acute infection studies. Preferred alternatives include MDRD equation back-calculation with a population mean GFR, age- and sex-specific GFR values corrected for "good health," or lowest measured creatinine. Studies using surrogate baseline creatinine values should report specific methodology.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 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

Citations82
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKidney International ReportsSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207