MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221054591 · doi:10.1016/j.xkme.2022.100440

Independent External Validation and Comparison of Death and Kidney Replacement Therapy Prediction Models in Advanced CKD

2022· article· en· W4221054591 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKidney diseaseCohortRenal replacement therapyInternal medicineRenal functionCohort studyStage (stratigraphy)Area under the curve

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rationale & Objective: The Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) is widely used to predict the risk of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) initiation in chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages G3-G5. The new Grams calculator developed for advanced CKD (stage G4+) predicts KRT initiation, cardiovascular events, and death by uniquely incorporating the competing risk of death. We aimed to validate this tool in a stage G4+ cohort for death and KRT. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting & Participants: ) who visited the multidisciplinary CKD clinic at Kingston Health Sciences Center in Ontario, Canada. Outcomes & Analytical Approach: Discrimination and calibration were examined for the outcome of death using the 2- and 4-year Grams scores. The 2- and 5-year KFRE and 2- and 4-year Grams scores were compared in terms of discrimination and calibration for KRT. Results: There were 91, 161, and 206 death events and 90, 145, and 159 KRT events in our cohort at 2, 4, and 5 years, respectively. The Grams model demonstrated modest discrimination for death at 4 years (area under the curve [AUC] 0.70; 95% CI, 0.65-0.75) and performed worse at 2 years (AUC, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.57-0.70). It only overpredicted death by approximately 10% across most of the predicted range. Both models had similar discrimination for KRT at 2 years (KFRE AUC, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.78-0.88 and Grams AUC, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.76-0.87), 4 years (Grams AUC, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.77-0.86), and 5 years (KFRE AUC, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.76-0.85). There was excellent calibration for KRT using the 2-year KFRE and Grams values for predicted risk thresholds of ≤15% and using the 5-year KFRE and 4-year Grams values for predicted risk thresholds of ≤20%. At higher risk ranges, KFRE overpredicts and Grams underpredicts the KRT risk. Limitations: This is a single-center study with a primarily White cohort limited by smaller sample sizes at the higher ranges of the predicted risks, particularly for the Grams calculator. Conclusions: The Grams model provides moderately accurate death predictions, and consideration should be given to its incorporation into patient education and advanced care planning. Both the Grams and KFRE models remain clinically useful for determining KRT risks in advanced CKD.

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)0.000
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 score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.282 · 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