Female Reproductive and Gynecologic Considerations in Chronic Kidney Disease: Adolescence and Young Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increasingly affects younger people, including adolescents and young adults. CKD among females is accompanied by unique reproductive and gynecologic health concerns; though to date, this area has not been well studied. Hormonal disruptions attributed to CKD may underlie the high prevalence of abnormal uterine bleeding and influence the age of menarche in adolescents. Period poverty as a socioeconomic barrier further exacerbates the female-specific burdens of CKD. Reduced fertility in CKD is likely multifactorial and may be related to a reduction in ovarian reserve, reproductive hormone disturbances, and gonadotoxic medication use in addition to low sexual function and activity. Fertility, sexual function and activity, and risk of sexually transmitted infections increase with transplantation. Pregnancy is possible at any stage of CKD, although often accompanied by high risks of maternal and fetal complications. Contraception is thus an important consideration in CKD, but use is low and the risks and benefits of different forms in the setting of CKD are not well characterized. Though patients with CKD report reproductive health as an important element of care, many nephrologists report lack of confidence and training in this area, highlighting the need for targeted research and education. The unique reproductive health care needs of the growing transgender youth population warrant attention in nephrology training with multidisciplinary input. This review will discuss female reproductive health and gynecologic considerations in adolescents and young adults with CKD while proposing clinical and research strategies to improve this understudied yet important aspect of kidney care.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".