MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4397040488 · doi:10.1681/asn.20233411s11153c

Cognitive Improvement in ESRD Patients After Renal Transplantation: A Prospective Observational Study

2023· article· en· W4397040488 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Simran Sawhney, Vijay Kher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal and Vascular Pathologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyMedicineTransplantationCognitionIntensive care medicineProspective cohort studyKidney transplantationInternal medicineEnd stage renal diseaseHemodialysisPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Although there is a well-established survival benefit of renal transplant, the evidence of its effect on cognitive function is limited and not entirely consistent. Up to 30 - 70 % of end stage renal disease patients are reported to have cognitive deficits. The etiology of cognitive impairment in chronic kidney disease patients is multifactorial. Kidney transplantation can correct the metabolic derangements and eliminate the fluid and osmotic shifts that patients can experience on dialysis; however, cognitive impairments still persist post-transplant. Further research is warranted to better understand the impact of kidney transplant on a wide array of cognitive domains. Methods: 100 patients, age between 18 to 60 years who underwent renal transplantation in Medanta Hospital, India were prospectively studied from September, 2021 to December 2022. The aim was to determine the proportion of patients showing cognitive improvement 3 months and 6 months post renal transplant using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and to find the cognitive domains which show significant improvement 3 months and 6 months post transplant. Results: Proportion of patients showing cognitive improvement 3 months and 6 months post transplant was 26% and 56%, respectively. The mean MoCA score (out of total of 30) at pre transplant, at 3 months and 6 months post-transplant was 24.08 ± 3.08, 24.32 ± 2.90 and 25.28 ± 3.05, respectively. Mean MoCA score after 6 months of transplant, when compared to the mean score at pre transplant level was found to be statistically significant (p value <0.001). Delayed recall showed significant improvement 3 months and 6 months post-transplant (p value- 0.016 and < 0.001 respectively). Conclusions: Significant cognitive improvement was seen 6 months post renal transplant. Delayed recall showed significant improvement 3 months and 6 months post transplant. - Montreal Cognitive assessment (MoCA) score Mean Difference Std. Error p value 95% Confidence Interval for Difference Lower Bound Upper Bound At 0 months At 3 months -0.24 0.105 0.071 -0.495 0.015 At 6 months -1.200 0.303 <.001 -1.938 -0.462 At 3 months At 6 months -.960 0.272 0.002 -1.622 -0.298

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicRenal and Vascular PathologiesFrench-language works237,207