MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396989850 · doi:10.1681/asn.20223311s1683a

Insights Into Current Practices and Unmet Needs Relating to CKD-Associated Pruritus: Results From a Canadian Nephrologist Survey

2022· article· en· W4396989850 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel K. Schwartz, Gerald Miciak, Arthur Magnaye

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNephrologyMedicineInternal medicineIntensive care medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) is a common condition in patients with CKD undergoing hemodialysis (HD). In this real-world study, Canadian nephrologists were surveyed to gain insight into current practices and unmet needs related to the treatment of CKD-aP. Methods: Quantitative data regarding the perception of current treatment practices for CKD-aP were collected in November and December 2021 by a 20-minute survey completed by 62 nephrologists across Canada. Respondents' level of agreement was assessed using a 7-point scale. Results: In current practice, the mean perceived prevalence of CKD-aP in HD patients was 30.5%. Of these, 33.6% and 18.3%, respectively, experience moderate or severe CKD-aP. CKD-aP was most frequently identified (75.8% of cases) through patients complaining of itch to the multidisciplinary health care team. In clinical practice 63% of respondents currently do not use formal scales to diagnose and assess CKD-aP. Treatments used for severe and moderate CKD-aP are shown in the table. Nephrologists used topical moisturizers / emollients (85%), oral antihistamines (14%), and gabapentinoids (2%) as first-line treatments. Nephrologists reported 42% of patients with severe CKD-aP and 41% with moderate CKD-aP do not respond to treatment. Most nephrologists (94%) agreed there is a need for new treatments specifically designed to address CKD-aP, 68% agreed they do not expect to resolve a patient's CKD-aP with currently available treatments, 89% agreed CKD-aP is challenging to treat, and 69% agreed there is a need for guidelines for the treatment of CKD-aP. Conclusions: This real-world Canadian study of nephrologists showed that CKD-aP is challenging to treat and many patients do not respond to currently-available treatments. There is an urgent unmet need for new, more effective treatments and for guidelines to aid nephrologists in selecting therapy for their patients with CKD-aP. Funding: Commercial Support - OtsukaTreatment Choices

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicDermatology and Skin Diseases→French-language works237,207→