MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210491201 · doi:10.1093/ckj/sfac030

Sex differences in chronic kidney disease prevalence in Asia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4210491201 on OpenAlex
Carinna Hockham, Lexia Bao, Anushree Tiku, Sunil V. Badve, Aminu K. Bello, Meg Jardine, Vivekanand Jha, Tadashi Toyama, Mark Woodward, Min Jun

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

VenueClinical Kidney Journal · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAstraZeneca
KeywordsMeta-analysisDemographyConfidence intervalMedicineKidney diseaseEast AsiaPopulationRandom effects modelSex ratioChinaInternal medicineEnvironmental healthGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Previous reports on the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in Asia have suggested important sex disparities but have been inconsistent in nature. We sought to synthesize available sex-disaggregated CKD prevalence data in Asia to quantify sex disparities in the region. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE and Embase for observational studies involving ≥500 adults who reported sex-disaggregated CKD prevalence data in any of the 26 countries in East, Southeast and South Asia. For each study we calculated the female:male prevalence ratio (PR), with a ratio >1 indicating a higher female prevalence. For each country, log-transformed PRs were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. These were then combined using a fixed effects model, weighting by population size, to estimate a pooled PR for each of East, Southeast and South Asia and Asia overall. Results: Sex-disaggregated data were available from 171 cohorts, spanning 15 countries and comprising 2 550 169 females and 2 595 299 males. Most studies (75.4%) came from East Asia (China, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea). Across Asia, CKD prevalence was higher in females {pooled prevalence 13.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.3-14.9]} compared with males [pooled prevalence 12.1% (95% CI 10.3-14.1)], with a pooled PR of 1.07 (95% CI 0.99-1.17). Substantial heterogeneity was observed between countries. The pooled PRs for East, Southeast and South Asia were 1.11 (95% CI 1.02-1.21), 1.09 (0.88-1.36) and 1.03 (0.87-1.22), respectively. Conclusions: Current evidence suggests considerable between-country and -region heterogeneity in the female:male PR of CKD. However, there remains a large part of the region where data on sex-specific CKD prevalence are absent or limited. Country-level assessment of the differential burden of CKD in females and males is needed to define locally relevant policies that address the needs of both sexes.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.008
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.260 · 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