MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407193255 · doi:10.1684/ndt.2024.86

Traduction et adaptation française de la nomenclature pour la fonction et les maladies rénales issue de la conférence de consensus KDIGO

2024· article· fr· W4407193255 on OpenAlexaff
Olivier Bonny, Ibtissam Arbaoui, Denis Fouque, Aghilès Hamroun, Michel Jadoul, Bénédicte Stengel, François Babinet, Isabelle Binet, Pascaline Faure, Luc Frimat, François Folefack Kaze, Hélène Lazareth, Yves Poulin, Daniel Schiltz, Anne Stinat, Cécile Vandevivère, Serge Quérin

Bibliographic record

VenueNéphrologie & Thérapeutique · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalCentre Intégré de Santé et de Services Sociaux des Laurentides
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsensus conferenceNomenclaturePolitical scienceMedicineBiologyTaxonomy (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A harmonized medical nomenclature that is accessible to the lay people is crucial to raising awareness of insidious health problems such as chronic kidney disease and facilitating communication between healthcare professionals. This article presents the proposals of a French-speaking working group for the translation and adaptation into French of the nomenclature for renal function and disease that resulted from a KDIGO consensus conference published in English in 2020. In particular, the working group recommends abandoning terms that used to correspond in French to “chronic renal failure”, “acute renal failure”, “end-stage renal failure”, “uremia”, “cadaveric donor” and “microalbuminuria”, in favor of French equivalents of “chronic renal disease”, “acute kidney injury”, “renal failure”, “uremic syndrome”, “deceased donor” and “albuminuria”. Arguments against the former and in favor of the latter are presented. Other equivalents of English terms from the KDIGO nomenclature are presented in a Table, and an Appendix presents equivalents proposed in German and Spanish by other authors. We hope that our proposals will be well received by healthcare professionals as well as by their patients and the public.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0050.008
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.360 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNéphrologie & ThérapeutiqueSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207