MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3164500762 · doi:10.3233/shti210146

Analyzing Association Rules for Graft Failure Following Deceased and Live Donor Kidney Transplantation

2021· book-chapter· en· W3164500762 on OpenAlexaff
Syed Asil Ali Naqvi, Karthik Tennankore, Amanda J. Vinson, Syed Sibte Raza Abidi

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKidney transplantationTransplantationDiseaseDiabetes mellitusCoronary artery diseaseIntensive care medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the clinical attributes that contribute to kidney graft failure following live and deceased donor transplantation using an association rule mining approach. The generated rules are used to analyze the distinctive co-occurrence of attributes for those with or without all-cause graft failure. Analysis of a kidney transplantation dataset acquired from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients that included over 95000 deceased and live donor recipients over 5-years was performed. Using an association rule mining approach, we were able to confirm established risk factors for graft loss after live and deceased donor transplantation and identify novel combinations of factors that may have implications for clinical care and risk prediction post kidney transplantation. Using lift as the metric to evaluate association rules, our results indicate that advanced recipient age (i.e. over 60 years), end stage kidney disease due to diabetes, the presence of recipient peripheral vascular disease and recipient coronary artery disease have a high likelihood of graft failure within 5 years after transplantation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informatics→Same topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments→French-language works237,207→