Chronic kidney disease–associated pruritus: a comparison of instruments and associations with patient-reported outcomes using an electronic patient-reported outcome survey in Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The associations between self-reported chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been reported using various instruments to assess itch. Data collection via multiple CKD-aP instruments allows the evaluation of different domains and measurements of CKD-aP burden and may help tailor data capture for future research or clinical care. Methods: An electronic PRO (ePRO) survey was distributed to European hemodialysis (HD) patients enrolled in the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) in 2021-23. The DOPPS is an international cohort study that aims to investigate practice patterns and outcomes in HD patients. The ePRO survey included multiple CKD-aP instruments: Average Itch and Worst Itching Intensity Numerical Rating Scales (AI-NRS, WI-NRS) and a Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOL)-36 single question. Linear and logistic regression were used to estimate adjusted associations between CKD-aP instruments and various PROs. Results: This analysis included 769 patients who completed the WI-NRS from HD facilities in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the UK. The correlation between WI-NRS and the KDQOL-36 itch question was 0.88 overall and 0.46 among patients at least somewhat bothered by itch. Mean WI-NRS scores stratified by response to the KDQOL-36 itch question were 8.1, 6.4, 4.1 and 3.1 for extremely, very much, moderately and somewhat bothered, respectively. Patients with worse WI-NRS scores reported worse sleep quality, greater fatigue, more depressive symptoms, and lower mental and physical quality of life; these associations were similar to those observed for the KDQOL-36 itch question. Conclusion: Correlation between CKD-aP instruments was high overall, but moderate among the subgroup of patients bothered by itch; differences can be partially attributed to the recall period for the KDQOL-36 (4 weeks) vs the AI- and WI-NRS (24 h). The consistent associations of these instruments with poor outcomes underscores the importance to identify and effectively treat HD patients suffering from pruritus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".