MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4397047992 · doi:10.1681/asn.20233411s1667b

Long-Term Outcomes in Persons with Stage 3 CKD Recruited from Primary Care

2023· article· en· W4397047992 on OpenAlexaff
Maarten W. Taal, Natasha J. McIntyre, Christopher W. McIntyre, Richard Fluck

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStage (stratigraphy)Term (time)MedicinePrimary careIntensive care medicineKidney diseaseInternal medicinePediatricsGerontologyFamily medicineBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The majority of persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are elderly, have moderately reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and are cared for in primary care in the UK. There are few long term studies to describe the risks of adverse outcomes in this under-studied population. Methods: Participants with CKD stage 3 were recruited from primary care in 2008-10. Clinical assessment and investigations were performed at baseline, 1 and 5 years. In 2019-20, electronic records were reviewed to obtain data on deaths and latest available outpatient estimated GFR (eGFR) and urine albumin to creatinine ratio (UACR). CKD progression was defined as a decline in eGFR of ≥25% and progression to a more advanced stage. Results: Participants: 1741 with median (IQR) age 74 (67-79) years, eGFR 53.8 (45.3-61.7) ml/min/1.73m2, UACR 0.3 (0.001-1.5) mg/mmol; 16.9% diabetes at baseline. Outcomes: 680 deaths (39.1%); CKD progression in 430 of 1402 (30.7%) participants after a median 9.8 (9.2-10.0) years; only 24 of 1741 (1.4%) reached CKD stage 5. UACR increased from 0.3 (0.001-1.26) to 1.4 (0.3-5.90) mg/mmol (p<0.001) in 1188 participants with repeat measurements. Changes in KDIGO GFR category are presented in the table. CKD category improved in 161 (11.5%), progressed in 695 (49.6%) and did not change in 546 (38.9%). Logistic regression analysis identified male sex, diabetes status and lower baseline eGFR, higher baseline UACR and systolic blood pressure (SBP) as independent predictors of CKD progression. Cox Proportional Hazards models identified age, male sex, diabetes status, past or current smoking, lower baseline eGFR and higher baseline UACR as independent risk factors for all-cause mortality. Conclusions: CKD progression was observed in a minority of participants and < 2% reached CKD stage 5. The risk of CKD progression was exceeded by the competing risk of death. Our observations confirm that in primary care, persons with CKD require monitoring and interventions to minimise risk of adverse outcomes but few progress to kidney failure. Funding: Commercial Support - Roche, Private Foundation Support - Year 10 CKD Category Baseline CKD Category 1 (n=8; 0.6%) 2 (n=281; 20%) 3a (n=492; 35%) 3b (n=424; 30%) 4 (n=173; 12%) 5 (n=24; 2%) 1 (n=1; 0.1%) 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 (n=475; 34%) 7 176 198 83 11 0 3a (n=632; 45%) 1 93 251 227 56 4 3b (n=275; 20%) 0 10 43 108 95 19 4 (n=19; 1.4%) 0 1 0 6 11 1

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.271 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→