Association of average daily corticosteroid dose with time to relapse in children with idiopathic nephrotic syndrome: Results from a longitudinal cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background In this longitudinal cohort study, we aimed to determine the association between average daily corticosteroid dose and time to first relapse among children with first presentation of nephrotic syndrome. Method We enrolled children (1–18 years) with nephrotic syndrome at the time of first presentation of nephrotic syndrome across 11 Canadian centers in the CHILDNEPH study between 2013–2019. Exposure was within-person average daily corticosteroid dose. Primary outcome was time to first relapse after entry into the study. Cox proportional hazards regression models were created to estimate the risk of relapse after adjusting for potential confounders. Results Among 328 children (129 females) with median age 4.3 (IQR 3.6) years, the unadjusted median time to first relapse in the study was 128 (42–707) days. The relationship between average daily corticosteroid dose and time to relapse was modified by age (HR: 0.87, 95% CI 0.82–0.93) with younger children having a higher risk of relapse compared to older children for the same corticosteroid dose. Relationships between time to first relapse, average corticosteroid dose, and age remained unchanged when including those children who entered the study at first or second relapse or those who relapsed while tapering the prednisone during the episode at entry in the study. Conclusion Younger children, despite receiving same average daily corticosteroid dose, experience faster time to relapse compared to older children. Further study is warranted to examine the optimal dosing of corticosteroids by age of the child.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".