MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206829205 · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3133700

A Machine Learning Analysis of Health Records of Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease at Risk of Cardiovascular Disease

2021· article· en· W4206829205 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKidney diseaseMedicineContext (archaeology)DiseaseDiabetes mellitusMedical recordRenal functionRanking (information retrieval)Feature (linguistics)Term (time)Artificial intelligenceIntensive care medicineComputer scienceMachine learningInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) describes a long-term decline in kidney function and has many causes. It affects hundreds of millions of people worldwide every year. It can have a strong negative impact on patients, especially when combined with cardiovascular disease (CVD): patients with both conditions have lower survival chances. In this context, computational intelligence applied to electronic health records can provide insights to physicians that can help them make better decisions about prognoses or therapies. In this study we applied machine learning to medical records of patients with CKD and CVD. First, we predicted if patients develop severe CKD, both including and excluding information about the year it occurred or date of the last visit. Our methods achieved top mean Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) of +0.499 in the former case and a mean MCC of +0.469 in the latter case. Then, we performed a feature ranking analysis to understand which clinical factors are most important: age, eGFR, and creatinine when the temporal component is absent; hypertension, smoking, and diabetes when the year is present. We then compared our results with the current scientific literature, and discussed the different results obtained when the time feature is excluded or included. Our results show that our computational intelligence approach can provide insights about diagnosis and and relative important of different clinical variables that otherwise would be impossible to observe.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.342 · 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