Association of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation With High Health Care Costs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The Kidney Failure Risk Equations (KFRE) are accurate and validated to predict the risk of kidney failure in individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD), but their potential to predict health care costs in the US health care system is unknown. We assessed the association of kidney failure risk from the 4-variable and 8-variable 2-year KFRE models with monthly health care costs in US patients with CKD stages G3 and G4. Methods: This was an ancillary study to a larger observational, retrospective cohort study examining the association between serum bicarbonate and adverse kidney outcomes. Monthly medical costs were calculated from individual health care insurance claims. Generalized linear regression models were used to examine the association of KFRE score with health care costs. Results: = 0.014) increase in monthly costs for patients with CKD stage G3 and G4, respectively. Conclusion: Higher risks of kidney failure as predicted by the 4-variable or 8-variable KFRE were associated with higher 2-year medical costs for patients with CKD stages G3 and G4. The KFRE may be a useful tool to anticipate medical costs and target cost-reducing interventions for patients at risk of kidney failure.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".