MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Shifts in KDIGO CKD risk groups with empagliflozin: Kidney-protection from SGLT2 inhibition across the spectrum of risk

2023· article· en· W4387502279 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Weingold, Bernard Zinman, Michaela Mattheus, Anne Pernille Ofstad, Dominik Steubl, Christoph Wanner, Silvio E. Inzucchi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Diabetes and its Complications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersBoehringer Ingelheim
KeywordsEmpagliflozinMedicineRisk factorDiabetes mellitusKidney diseaseInternal medicinePlaceboCategorizationType 2 diabetesEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

T2D is a well-established risk factor for development and progression of CKD. KDIGO recommends categorization of risk by likelihood of progression to ESKD. Compared to placebo, empagliflozin decreases likelihood of worsening (OR 0.70, 95 % CI 0.62-0.78) and increases likelihood of improvement (OR 1.56, 95 % CI 1.30-1.86) in KDIGO risk category.

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)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Diabetes and its ComplicationsSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207