A Health Survey–Based Prediction Equation for Incident CKD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prediction tools that incorporate self-reported health information could increase CKD awareness, identify modifiable lifestyle risk factors, and prevent disease. We developed and validated a survey-based prediction equation to identify individuals at risk for incident CKD (eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2), with and without a baseline eGFR. METHODS: A cohort of adults with an eGFR ≥70 ml/min per 1.73 m2 from Ontario, Canada, who completed a comprehensive general population health survey between 2000 and 2015 were included (n=22,200). Prediction equations included demographics (age, sex), comorbidities, lifestyle factors, diet, and mood. Models with and without baseline eGFR were derived and externally validated in the UK Biobank (n=15,522). New-onset CKD (eGFR <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2) with ≤8 years of follow-up was the primary outcome. RESULTS: Among Ontario individuals (mean age, 55 years; 58% women; baseline eGFR, 95 (SD 15) ml/min per 1.73 m2), new-onset CKD occurred in 1981 (9%) during a median follow-up time of 4.2 years. The final models included lifestyle factors (smoking, alcohol, physical activity) and comorbid illnesses (diabetes, hypertension, cancer). The model was discriminating in individuals with and without a baseline eGFR measure (5-year c-statistic with baseline eGFR: 83.5, 95% confidence interval [CI], 82.2 to 84.9; without: 81.0, 95% CI, 79.8 to 82.4) and well calibrated. In external validation, the 5-year c-statistic was 78.1 (95% CI, 74.2 to 82.0) and 66.0 (95% CI, 61.6 to 70.4), with and without baseline eGFR, respectively, and maintained calibration. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported lifestyle and health behavior information from health surveys may aid in predicting incident CKD. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.asn-online.org/media/podcast.aspx?p=CJASN&e=2023_01_10_CJN05650522.mp3.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".