MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174466656 · doi:10.2337/db21-1051-p

1051-P: Inside CKD: Modeling the Future Global Burden of Chronic Kidney Disease in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

2021· article· en· W3174466656 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Juan José García Sánchez, Alyshah Abdul Sultan, Johan Ärnlöv, Marcelo Costa Batista, Claudia Cabrera, Joshua Card-Gowers, Steven J. Chadban, Glenn M. Chertow, Luca DeNicola, Jean‐Michel Halimi, Eiichiro Kanda, Guisen Li, Francesco Saverio Mennini, Juan F. Navarro‐González, Stephen Nolan, Albert Power, Lise Retat, Navdeep Tangri, Laura Webber, Jay B. Wish, Michael Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKidney diseaseType 2 diabetesMedicineMicrosimulationDemographicsPsychological interventionConcomitantDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineDemographyNursingEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a leading cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Future trajectories of CKD prevalence, progression, and outcomes in patients with T2D are key considerations for policy planning and healthcare implementation. Using country-specific patient-level microsimulation, Inside CKD aims to model the global clinical and economic burden of CKD for 2020-2025.Methods: We used the Inside CKD microsimulation to model the clinical burden of CKD in patients with T2D. We constructed virtual populations using country-specific data, including demographics and prevalence of concomitant CKD (by stage) and T2D, from multiple published sources.Results: Preliminary data from three countries demonstrate that in 2020-2025 the number of patients with T2D and CKD is expected to rise by 6.5% in the UK, 13.2% in the US, and 16.6% in Canada (Figure). The largest increase is expected in the 35-64-years age group in the UK (21.8%) and in the ≥ 65-years age group in the US and Canada (16.7% and 21.2%, respectively).Conclusion: This microsimulation models a linear increase in the number of patients with both T2D and CKD over 5 years, including consistent increases in the number of patients with T2D and CKD stages 3b-5. Reliable epidemiologic models can help inform future country-specific healthcare policy and the design of interventions focused on early diagnosis and slowing CKD progression.View largeDownload slideView largeDownload slide DisclosureJ. Sanchez: Employee; Self; AstraZeneca, Stock/Shareholder; Self; AstraZeneca. J. Halimi: None. E. Kanda: Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca K. K. G. Li: None. F. Mennini: None. J. Navarro-gonzalez: None. S. T. Nolan: Employee; Self; AstraZeneca, Employee; Spouse/Partner; Biomarin, Stock/Shareholder; Self; AstraZeneca, Stock/Shareholder; Spouse/Partner; Biomarin. A. Power: Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Bayer U. S., Napp Pharmaceuticals, Vifor Pharma Management Ltd., Consultant; Self; AstraZeneca, Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., AstraZeneca, Napp Pharmaceuticals, Vifor Pharma Management Ltd. L. Retat: Employee; Self; HealthLumen. N. Tangri: Consultant; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., ClinPredict Inc, Eli Lilly and Company, Mesentech, Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc., PulseData, Roche Pharma, Tricida, Inc., Research Support; Self; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. L. Webber: Employee; Self; HealthLumen. A. Sultan: Employee; Self; AstraZeneca, Stock/Shareholder; Self; AstraZeneca. J. Wish: Advisory Panel; Self; Akebia Therapeutics, Inc., AstraZeneca, Rockwell Medical, Vifor Pharma Management Ltd., Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Akebia Therapeutics, Inc., AstraZeneca. M. Xu: Employee; Self; HealthLumen. J. Ärnlöv: Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Other Relationship; Self; Novartis AG. M. C. Batista: None. C. Cabrera: Employee; Self; AstraZeneca, Stock/Shareholder; Self; AstraZeneca. J. Card-gowers: Employee; Self; HealthLumen. S. Chadban: Advisory Panel; Self; Astellas Pharma Inc., AstraZeneca, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. G. M. Chertow: Advisory Panel; Self; Ardelyx, Baxter, Cricket Health, DURECT Corporation, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Reata Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Other Relationship; Self; Akebia Therapeutics, Inc., AstraZeneca, Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. L. Denicola: Consultant; Self; AstraZeneca, Mundipharma International, Novo Nordisk.FundingAstraZeneca

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueDiabetesSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207