MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283824390 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.2612

An international Delphi consensus regarding best practice recommendations for hyperkalaemia across the cardiorenal spectrum

2022· article· en· W4283824390 on OpenAlexaffabout
James O. Burton, Andrew J.S. Coats, Csaba P. Kövesdy, Biff F. Palmer, Ileana L. Piña, Giuseppe Rosano, Manish M. Sood, Shelley Zieroth

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPotassium and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineHeart failureIntensive care medicineKidney diseaseDelphi methodDiscontinuationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) are guideline-recommended therapy for individuals with cardiorenal disease. They are associated with increased risk of hyperkalaemia, a common and life-threatening disorder for this population. RAASi-induced hyperkalaemia often leads to dose reduction or discontinuation, reducing cardiorenal protection. Guideline recommendations differ between specialties for the clinical management of hyperkalaemia. Using a modified Delphi method, we developed consensus recommendations for optimal management of hyperkalaemia in adults with cardiorenal disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: An international steering group of cardiologists and nephrologists developed 39 statements regarding hyperkalaemia care, including risk factors and risk stratification, prevention, correction, and cross-specialty coordination. Consensus was determined by agreement on an online questionnaire administered to cardiorenal specialists across Europe and North America. The threshold for consensus agreement was established a priori by the steering group at 67%. Across November 2021, 520 responses were received from Canada (n = 50), France (n = 50), Germany (n = 54), Italy (n = 58), Spain (n = 57), the UK (n = 49), and the US (n = 202); 268 from cardiologists and 252 from nephrologists. Twenty-nine statements attained very high agreement (≥90%) and 10 attained high agreement (≥67%-<90%), with strong alignment between cardiologists and nephrologists. CONCLUSION: A high degree of consensus regarding hyperkalaemia evaluation and management exists among healthcare professionals. Based on high levels of agreement, the steering group derived six key recommendations for hyperkalaemia prevention and management in people with cardiorenal disease. Future studies examining the quality of hyperkalaemia care delivery are required.

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)0.279
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.274
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2790.274
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0030.015
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations41
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicPotassium and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207