MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311365510 · doi:10.1177/15269248221145034

Risk Factors for First and Recurrent Fractures among Kidney Transplant Recipients

2022· article· en· W4311365510 on OpenAlexaffabout
Norman Atagu, Stefani Mihilli, Huong Thao Nguyen, Alicia Wu, Olusegun Famure, Yanhong Li, S. Joseph Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Transplantation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Internal medicineCumulative incidenceDialysisKidney transplantationOsteoporosisPopulationDiabetes mellitusTransplantationSurgeryRisk factorEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Kidney transplantation is associated with increased risk of bone fracture. Current literature reports widely variable fracture burden and contains limited data on risk factors for recurrent fractures. Methods: The incidence of all and major osteoporotic fractures (hip, forearm, thoracolumbar, and proximal humerus) were assessed. The risk factors for first and recurrent fractures among 1285 Canadian kidney transplant recipients transplanted between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2013 were also identified. Results: The 10-year cumulative incidence of all fractures and major osteoporotic fractures in this population was 27.1% (95% CI: 22.5, 32.4) and 17.8% (95% CI: 13.4, 23.5), respectively. On multivariable analysis, female sex (HR = 1.64 [95% CI: 1.20, 2.26]), history of fracture (HR = 1.54 [95% CI: 1.12, 2.11]), and pretransplant diabetes (HR = 1.85 [95% CI: 1.29, 2.65]) were recipient factors found to increase the risk for any first fracture posttransplant. These risk factors persist in analysis with the time origin 3-months posttransplant, where transplant age (HR = 1.01 [95% CI: 1.00, 1.03]) and increased time on pretransplant dialysis (HR = 1.06 [95% CI: 1.00, 1.12]) also emerge as risk factors for first fracture. On multivariable shared frailty model analysis, increased risk of recurrent fractures was associated with recipient female sex (HR = 1.74 [95% CI: 1.21, 2.51]) and history of diabetes (HR = 1.76 [95% CI: 1.17, 2.66]). Discussion: The results suggested that some risk factors for first fracture may not inform risk of recurrent fractures. As such, fracture risk should be assessed accordingly to optimize long-term care and implement preventive measures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress in TransplantationSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207