CCL14 testing to guide clinical practice in patients with AKI: Results from an international expert panel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Urinary C-C motif chemokine ligand 14 (CCL14) is a strong predictor of persistent stage 3 acute kidney injury (AKI). Multiple clinical actions are recommended for AKI but how these are applied in individual patients and how the CCL14 test results may impact their application is unknown. METHODS: We assembled an international panel of 12 experts and conducted a modified Delphi process to evaluate patients at risk for persistent stage 3 AKI (lasting 72 hours or longer). Using a Likert scale, we rated 11 clinical actions based on international guidelines applied to each case before and after CCL14 testing and analyzed the association between the strength and direction of recommendations and CCL14 results. RESULTS: The strength and direction of clinical recommendations were strongly influenced by CCL14 results (P < 0.001 for the interaction). Nine (82%) recommendations for clinical actions were significantly impacted by CCL14 results (P < 0.001 comparing low to highest CCL14 risk category). CONCLUSIONS: Most recommendations for care of patients with stage 2-3 by an international panel of experts were strongly modified by CCL14 test results. This work should set the stage for clinical practice protocols and studies to determine the effects of recommended actions informed by CCL14.
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 | 0.119 | 0.166 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".