MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ultrasonography in Acute Kidney Injury

2022· review· en· W4210654490 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrew A. Moses, Hilda Fernández

Bibliographic record

VenuePOCUS Journal · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcute kidney injuryMedicineCreatinineRenal functionIntensive care medicineMetabolic acidosisIntensive care unitKidney diseaseInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)UrinalysisMortality rateUrine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in the use of ultrasonography can enhance our ability to better characterize acute kidney injury (AKI). AKI is a clinical syndrome characterized by a rapid decrease in kidney excretory function with the accumulation of products of nitrogen metabolism and other clinically unmeasured waste products, and may proceed to include clinical manifestations including decreased urine output, development of metabolic acidosis, and electrolyte abnormalities [1]. The Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria defines AKI (Table 1). Staging severity of AKI guides the physician in respect to medical management and prognosis. The overall incidence of AKI is around 20% of patients hospitalized worldwide, and around 50% in intensive care unit (ICU) patients [2, 3]. AKI has been found to have increasing morbidity and mortality, no matter the cause of admission, as well as an in-hospital mortality of close to 50% [4]. In a large study of 8 ICUs over 8 years, Kellum et al. found that AKI was associated with increasing mortality rate with worsening AKI stage. A decrease in urine output alone, without an increase in serum creatinine, was associated with decreased 1-year survival [5]. Recurrent AKI has also been associated with increased mortality, further demonstrating the importance of detecting, monitoring, and diagnosing AKI [6].

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePOCUS JournalSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207