MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387195797 · doi:10.1177/20543581231203065

Variability in Reporting eGFR at Dialysis Initiation in Canada: A Research Letter

2023· article· en· W4387195797 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Chiu, Samuel A. Silver, Laura Berall, Isabelle Éthier, Claire Harris, Keigan More, Annie‐Claire Nadeau‐Fredette, Karthik Tennankore, Jay Hingwala

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversité de MontréalHumber River Regional HospitalDalhousie UniversityHealth Sciences CentreVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalQueen's UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDialysisNephrologyKidney diseaseFamily medicineRenal functionIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at dialysis initiation is increasingly recognized as a key quality indicator (QI) for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Specifically, guidelines recommend assessing deferral of dialysis initiation until symptoms arise or if the eGFR is ≤6 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . Despite the recognition of the importance of this QI, how eGFR at the time of dialysis initiation is defined, collected, and tracked at dialysis centers across Canada remains unknown. Objectives: To identify how provincial renal programs define eGFR at dialysis initiation, to compare practice across Canadian provinces, and to determine if there is a consistent benchmark for deferred dialysis start. Design: Cross-sectional survey distributed to the medical leads of each provincial renal program, administered from July 2021 to November 2021. Quebec was not included given it did not yet participate in Canadian Organ Replacement Register (CORR) data submission. Setting: The survey was designed and distributed by the Canadian Society of Nephrology Quality Improvement & Implementation Science Committee (CSN-QUIS) Indicator Working Group. Methods: The survey asked respondents on how eGFR is defined, collected, reported, and perceived barriers to QI data collection. The National Senior Renal Leaders Forum helped identify the key provincial medical leads to disseminate the survey for completion. Results: Surveys were distributed to the medical leads of the 9 provincial renal programs that participate in CORR. In total, there were 8 responses. Five provinces submit eGFR for all new dialysis starts and 3 provinces only submit this information for chronic patients. There is variation in determining when a patient with acute kidney injury requiring dialysis is classified as a chronic patient. Four provinces use a 30-day trigger, 3 provinces use a 90-day trigger, and the patient’s nephrologist makes this determination in 1 province. The creatinine used for the eGFR at dialysis initiation was the value measured on the first dialysis session (ie, day 0) for 5 provinces; the last outpatient clinic creatinine value in 2 provinces, and 1 province did not have a standard definition. Three provinces did not have a benchmark target for eGFR at dialysis initiation, 1 province had a target of <9.5 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , 3 provinces had a target of <10 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , 1 province had a target of <15 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . All 8 responding provincial medical leads support the establishment of a national benchmark for this measure. Limitations: This survey was restricted to provincial medical leads and therefore is unable to determine practice at individual dialysis sites. The survey was not anonymous, so it may be subject to conformity bias. Conclusions: There is wide variability in how eGFR at dialysis initiation is measured and reported across Canada. Additionally, there is no consensus on a benchmark target for an intent-to-defer dialysis strategy. Standardization of target eGFR at dialysis initiation may facilitate national reporting and quality improvement initiatives.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0090.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease→Same topicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes→French-language works237,207→