MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165409679 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfab194

Patient and caregiver perspectives on blood pressure in children with chronic kidney disease

2021· article· en· W3165409679 on OpenAlexaff
Justin G. Wu, Allison Tong, Nicole Evangelidis, Karine Manera, Camilla S. Hanson, Amanda Baumgart, Noa Amir, Aditi Sinha, Allison Dart, Allison A. Eddy, Chandana Guha, Debbie S. Gipson, Detlef Böckenhauer, Hui‐Kim Yap, Jaap W. Groothoff, Michael Zappitelli, Stephen I. Alexander, Susan L. Furth, Susan Samuel, Simon Carter, Amanda Walker, Joshua Kausman, David Martínez-Martín, Talia Gutman, Jonathan C. Craig

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKidney diseaseBlood pressureNephrologyAnxietyIntensive care medicineDiseasePhysical therapyInternal medicinePediatricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: More than 50% of children with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have uncontrolled hypertension, increasing their long-term risk of cardiovascular disease and progression to kidney failure. Children receiving medications or dialysis may also experience acute blood pressure fluctuations accompanied by debilitating symptoms. We aimed to describe the perspectives of children with CKD and their parental caregivers on blood pressure to inform patient-centered care. METHODS: Secondary thematic analysis was conducted on qualitative data from the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Children and Adolescents initiative, encompassing 16 focus groups, an international Delphi survey and two consensus workshops. We analyzed responses from children with CKD (ages 8-21 years) and caregivers (of children ages 0-21 years) pertaining to blood pressure. RESULTS: Overall, 120 patients and 250 caregivers from 22 countries participated. We identified five themes: invisibility and normalization (reassured by apparent normotension, absence of symptoms and expected links with CKD), confused by ambiguity (hypertension indistinguishable from cardiovascular disease, questioning the need for prophylactic intervention, frustrated by inconsistent messages and struggling with technical skills in measurement), enabling monitoring and maintaining health (gaging well-being and preventing vascular complications), debilitating and constraining daily living (provoking anxiety and agitation, helpless and powerless and limiting life activities) and burden of medications (overwhelmed by the quantity of tablets and distress from unexpected side effects). CONCLUSIONS: For children with CKD and their caregivers, blood pressure was an important heath indicator, but uncertainty around its implications and treatment hampered management. Providing educational resources to track blood pressure and minimizing symptoms and treatment burden may improve outcomes in children with 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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207