MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3204499528 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.7304

Kidney transplant outcomes after medical assistance in dying

2021· letter· en· W3204499528 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Patrick Luke, Anton Skaro, Alp Şener, Ephraim Tang, Max A. Levine, Samir Sami, John Basmaji, Ian Ball

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2021
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCreatinineKidney transplantationRenal functionKidney transplantKidneySurgeryTransplantationRetrospective cohort studyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: After nearly four years of Canadian experience with medical assistance in dying (MAID), the clinical volume of organ transplantation following MAID remains low. This is the first Canadian report evaluating recipient outcomes from kidney transplantation following MAID. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of the first nine cases of kidney transplants following MAID at a Canadian transplant center. RESULTS: Nine patients underwent MAID followed by kidney retrieval during the study period. Their diagnoses were largely neuromuscular diseases. The mean warm ischemic time was 20 minutes (standard deviation [SD] 7). The nine recipients had a mean age of 60 (SD 19.7). The mean cold ischemic time was 525 minutes (SD 126). Delayed graft function occurred in only one patient out of nine. The mean 30-day creatinine was 124 umol/L (SD 52). The mean three-month creatinine was 115 umol/L (SD 29). CONCLUSIONS: We report nine cases of kidney transplantation following MAID. The process minimized warm ischemia, resulting in low delayed graft function rates, and acceptable post-transplant outcomes. Further large-scale research is necessary to optimize processes and outcomes in this novel clinical pathway.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments→French-language works237,207→