Improvement of kidney function in patients with chronic kidney disease and severe obesity after bariatric surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The general management for chronic kidney disease (CKD) includes treating reversible causes, including obesity, which may be both a driver and comorbidity for CKD. Bariatric surgery has been shown to reduce the likelihood of CKD progression and improve kidney function in observational studies. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of patients with at least stage 3 CKD and obesity receiving bariatric surgery. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, CENTRAL and identified eligible studies reporting on kidney function outcomes in included patients before and after bariatric surgery with comparison to a medical intervention control if available. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle‐Ottawa Risk of Bias score. Nineteen studies were included for synthesis. Bariatric surgery showed improved eGFR with a mean difference (MD) of 11.64 (95%CI: 5.84 to 17.45, I 2 = 66%) ml/min/1.73m 2 and reduced SCr with MD of −0.24 (95%CI −0.21 to −0.39, I 2 = 0%) mg/dl after bariatric surgery. There was no significant difference in the relative risk (RR) of having CKD stage 3 after bariatric surgery, with a RR of −1.13 (95%CI: −0.83 to −2.07, I 2 = 13%), but there was reduced likelihood of having uACR >30 mg/g or above with a RR of −3.03 (95%CI: −1.44 to −6.40, I 2 = 91%). Bariatric surgery may be associated with improved kidney function with the reduction of BMI and may be a safe treatment option for patients with CKD. Future studies with more robust reporting are required to determine the feasibility of bariatric surgery for the treatment of 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it