MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296777849 · doi:10.1093/ckj/sfac213

Age and the eGFR-dependent risk for adverse clinical outcomes

2022· review· en· W4296777849 on OpenAlexafffund
Ping Liu, Pietro Ravani

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Kidney Journal · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsAbsolute risk reductionRelative riskMedicineKidney diseaseRenal functionAbsolute (philosophy)Relative survivalEpidemiologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the relative risk of kidney failure increases with more severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) independent of age, with older age the absolute risk of kidney failure at a given time horizon becomes smaller. In this article, we first review some epidemiological measures of outcome occurrence (absolute rate or risk) and association (relative measures: difference or ratio of rates or risks). We emphasize that relative measures need to be presented along with absolute measures to be understood and absolute risk is more helpful than absolute rate when making treatment decisions. We then apply these principles to the discussion of the absolute and relative rates or risks of kidney failure and death across categories of estimated glomerular filtration rate and age. Lastly, we discuss the implications of existing studies on whether the definition of CKD should account for age.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Kidney JournalSame topicChronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesFrench-language works237,207