MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405656107 · doi:10.14740/jocmr6101

Association Between Chronic Kidney Disease Risk Categories and Abdominal Aortic Calcification: Insights From the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

2024· article· en· W4405656107 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Song Peng Ang, Jackson Rajendran, Jia Ee Chia, Pratiksha Singh, José Iglesias

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParathyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNational Health and Nutrition Examination SurveyCalcificationKidney diseaseDiseaseAbdominal aortic aneurysmEnvironmental healthInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Abdominal aortic calcification (AAC) is a critical indicator of cardiovascular risk, particularly in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Traditional classification systems may underestimate the risk in those with moderate CKD. This study aimed to evaluate the association between CKD risk categories - defined by both estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria - and the prevalence of severe AAC. Methods: This cross-sectional study analyzed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2013-2014. We included adults aged ≥ 40 years who underwent imaging for AAC assessment, excluding pregnant individuals and those without AAC scores. Survey-weighted and multivariate logistic regression was employed to assess the relationship between CKD risk categories and severe AAC, adjusting for age, hypertension, and smoking history. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore variability across demographic and clinical subgroups. Results: We analyzed data from 3,140 participants in the NHANES, 423 (13.4%) of whom had severe AAC. The cohort was categorized into CKD risk categories 1 through 4, with the majority (76%) in stage 1. Severe AAC was more prevalent among older individuals and those with traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Initial unadjusted analyses revealed that CKD category 2 was associated with a nearly fourfold increase in severe AAC (odds ratio (OR): 3.93), while categories 3 and 4 showed 3.75-fold and over 10-fold increases, respectively (all P < 0.01). However, after adjusting for confounders, categories 2 and 4 showed higher risks of severe AAC compared to category 1, but these associations did not reach statistical significance (OR: 1.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90 - 1.86, P = 0.06 and OR: 5.70, 95% CI: 0.85 - 38.00, P = 0.07, respectively). Conclusion: Our study offers insights that may complement the current reliance on eGFR and albuminuria in risk stratification, highlighting that CKD category 2, defined by mildly reduced eGFR and albuminuria, may be a potential marker for severe AAC. Although statistical significance was narrowly missed after full adjustment, the clinical implications remain significant, advocating for more aggressive cardiovascular risk management in this population. This understanding may contribute to evolving approaches in CKD-related cardiovascular risk assessment and inform potential intervention strategies.

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)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research→Same topicParathyroid Disorders and Treatments→French-language works237,207→