MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4397025474 · doi:10.1681/asn.20213210s1738c

The Kidney Failure Risk Equation as a Predictor of Healthcare Costs

2021· article· en· W4397025474 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy L. Reaven, Susan E. Funk, Vandana Mathur, Julie Lai, Navdeep Tangri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHealth careIntensive care medicineInternal medicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Kidney Failure Risk Equations (KFRE) are accurate and validated to predict the risk of kidney failure in individuals with CKD, but little is known about their potential to predict healthcare costs. We assessed the 4- and 8-variable 2-year KFRE models as independent predictors of monthly healthcare costs in patients with CKD stages 3-4. Methods: Optum's de-identified Integrated Claims-Clinical dataset of US patients (2007-2017) was queried to identify patients with non-dialysis CKD stages 3-4 (90-day average eGFR ≥15 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) followed by 2 consecutive serum bicarbonate 12 to <30 mEq/L, 28-365 days apart, with 6 months pre-index data and ≥2 years of post-index or death within 2 years, plus concurrent medical claims. The first qualifying serum bicarbonate test established the index date. KFRE elements were evaluated during the pre-index period and predicted risk scores of 2-year kidney failure were computed for each patient. Monthly medical costs were calculated for each patient from individual healthcare insurance claims and log-transformed due to skew. Patients were also stratified by index CKD stage. Generalized linear regression models were used to examine the association of KFRE score and costs. The individual components of the KFRE were similarly analyzed. Results: 1721 patients qualified for this observational study (1475 and 246 with CKD stage 3 and 4 at index, respectively). Both the 4- and 8-variable KFRE assessments were associated with log monthly medical costs. Per 1% increased risk for 2-year kidney failure risk predicted by KFRE, costs were increased significantly: for CKD stage 3 (parameter estimates: 0.065 [P=0.016] and 0.126 [P<0.0001]) and for CKD stage 4 (parameter estimates: 0.029 [P=0.001] and 0.040 [P<0.0001]). Of the individual components, lower serum albumin and lower serum bicarbonate were consistently associated with higher monthly medical costs. Conclusions: Both the 4- and 8-variable KFRE were associated with higher medical costs for patients with CKD stages 3 or 4, with monthly medical cost increases of 6.7% - 13.5% for CKD stage 3 and 2.9% - 4.1% for CKD stage 4, respectively, for each 1% increase in 2-year kidney failure risk. The KFRE may be a useful tool to anticipate medical costs for patients at risk of kidney failure. Funding: Commercial Support - Tricida, Inc.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.280
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicHealthcare Policy and Management→French-language works237,207→