KDIGO 2024 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody (ANCA)–Associated Vasculitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2024 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody (ANCA)–Associated Vasculitis represents a focused update of the ANCA-Associated Vasculitis chapter from the KDIGO 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Glomerular Diseases. The aim is to assist clinicians caring for people with ANCA-associated vasculitis. The update takes into consideration evidence from randomized controlled trials published since February 2022. As in 2021, the chapter follows the same template providing guidance related to diagnosis, prognosis, treatment, and special situations. Based on the evidence, this update is mostly focused on guidance related to treatment of ANCA-associated vasculitis. Development of this guideline followed an explicit process of evidence review and appraisal. Treatment approaches and guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies, and appraisal of the certainty of the evidence and the strength of recommendations followed the “Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation” (GRADE) approach. Limitations of the evidence are discussed and areas of future research are also presented.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
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".