Development and Validation of Prediction Models of Adverse Kidney Outcomes in the Population With and Without Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To predict adverse kidney outcomes for use in optimizing medical management and clinical trial design. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this meta-analysis of individual participant data, 43 cohorts (N = 1,621,817) from research studies, electronic medical records, and clinical trials with global representation were separated into development and validation cohorts. Models were developed and validated within strata of diabetes mellitus (presence or absence) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR; ≥60 or <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) to predict a composite of ≥40% decline in eGFR or kidney failure (i.e., receipt of kidney replacement therapy) over 2-3 years. RESULTS: There were 17,399 and 24,591 events in development and validation cohorts, respectively. Models predicting ≥40% eGFR decline or kidney failure incorporated age, sex, eGFR, albuminuria, systolic blood pressure, antihypertensive medication use, history of heart failure, coronary heart disease, atrial fibrillation, smoking status, and BMI, and, in those with diabetes, hemoglobin A1c, insulin use, and oral diabetes medication use. The median C-statistic was 0.774 (interquartile range [IQR] = 0.753, 0.782) in the diabetes and higher-eGFR validation cohorts; 0.769 (IQR = 0.758, 0.808) in the diabetes and lower-eGFR validation cohorts; 0.740 (IQR = 0.717, 0.763) in the no diabetes and higher-eGFR validation cohorts; and 0.750 (IQR = 0.731, 0.785) in the no diabetes and lower-eGFR validation cohorts. Incorporating the previous 2-year eGFR slope minimally improved model performance, and then only in the higher-eGFR cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Novel prediction equations for a decline of ≥40% in eGFR can be applied successfully for use in the general population in persons with and without diabetes with higher or lower eGFR.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".