MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4292385092 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0272212

Longitudinal causal effect of modified creatinine index on all-cause mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease: Accounting for time-varying confounders using G-estimation

2022· article· en· W4292385092 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Aryaie, Hamid Sharifi, Azadeh Saber, Farzaneh Salehi, Mahyar Etminan, Maryam Nazemipour, Mohammad Alì Mansournia

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfoundingConfidence intervalEnd stage renal diseaseProportional hazards modelCreatinineInternal medicineBody mass indexHemodialysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Standard regression modeling may cause biased effect estimates in the presence of time-varying confounders affected by prior exposure. This study aimed to quantify the relationship between declining in modified creatinine index (MCI), as a surrogate marker of lean body mass, and mortality among end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients using G-estimation accounting appropriately for time-varying confounders. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of all registered ESRD patients (n = 553) was constructed over 8 years from 2011 to 2019, from 3 hemodialysis centers at Kerman, southeast of Iran. According to changes in MCI, patients were dichotomized to either the decline group or no-decline group. Subsequently the effect of interest was estimated using G-estimation and compared with accelerated failure time (AFT) Weibull models using two modelling strategies. RESULTS: Standard models demonstrated survival time ratios of 0.91 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.64 to 1.28) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.58 to 1.23) in patients in the decline MCI group compared to those in no-decline MCI group. This effect was demonstrated to be 0.57 (-95% CI: 0.21 to 0.81) using G-estimation. CONCLUSION: Declining in MCI increases mortality in patients with ESRD using G-estimation, while the AFT standard models yield biased effect estimate toward the null.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes→French-language works237,207→