Unveiling the Burden of Nephrolithiasis in Low- and Lower-Middle Income Countries: A Review on Its Presentation, Risk Factors, Treatment Practices, and Future Directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Nephrolithiasis, or kidney stone disease, presents a significant global health burden, with global incidence rates and treatment practices varying widely. This study aims to discuss the epidemiology, risk factors, treatment modalities, and challenges for nephrolithiasis in the lower half of the World Bank rankings; that is, in low- and lower-middle-income countries. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using PubMed for each country on the list, focusing on studies published from January 2000 onwards and reporting data on prevalence, risk factors, treatment practices, and economic implications. Results: Nephrolithiasis represents a significant burden for healthcare systems, with noteworthy geographical variability in prevalence possibly dependent on socioeconomic status and gender. Risk factors include dietary habits, climate, pollution, and infectious diseases. Treatment practices in some regions still rely on open surgery due to limited access to advanced endourological techniques, while other regions demonstrate high proactivity in research. The burden is exacerbated by inadequate healthcare infrastructure and training. Conclusions: Addressing nephrolithiasis in challenging economic circumstances requires targeted interventions, including improved access to modern treatment methods, enhanced training for healthcare professionals, and better socioeconomic and environmental conditions. Future research should focus on region-specific strategies and the development of sustainable healthcare solutions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".