MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414523792 · doi:10.1007/s13300-025-01787-8

Risk of Progression and Costs of Care for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease

2025· article· en· W4414523792 on OpenAlex
Navdeep Tangri, Rakesh K. Singh, Keith A. Betts, Yuxian Du, Sophie Gao, Arvind Katta, Youssef M.K. Farag, Samuel Fatoba, Hongjiao Liu, Jingyi Chen, Thomas W. Ferguson, Reid Whitlock, Silvia J. Leon, A.K. Singh

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsSeven Oaks General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsType 2 diabetesKidney diseaseDiabetes mellitusPsychological interventionHealth careDiseaseIdentification (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression is associated with a significant incremental economic burden. Previous work has demonstrated high accuracy of the laboratory-based machine learning model, Klinrisk, in predicting the risk of CKD progression. We sought to use the Klinrisk model to evaluate the association of risk of CKD progression with healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs of care in adults with type 2 diabetes and CKD. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included 413,177 eligible patients from Optum's electronic health records database (1/1/2007-9/30/2022). Patients were classified into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups based on their 2-year risk of CKD progression as predicted by the Klinrisk model. All-cause HRU and medical costs during the 1 year after CKD were estimated for each group. RESULTS: Of the 413,177 patients included, 110,399 (26.7%) were classified as low-risk of CKD progression, 253,188 (61.3%) as medium-risk, and 49,590 (12.0%) as high-risk. The observed risk of CKD progression at 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years was 18.6%, 36.5%, and 54.1% for high-risk patients, 3.7%, 11.7%, and 26.4% for medium-risk patients, and 1.5%, 5.7%, and 15.8% for low-risk patients, which were similar to the predicted risks of CKD progression. High-risk patients had higher HRU and more than 2-3 times higher costs than lower-risk patients. Inpatient costs were the major cost driver for high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: The Klinrisk model accurately identified patients with type 2 diabetes and CKD requiring the most healthcare resources. Such tools can support the identification and targeting of high-risk patients for interventions that may lead to a more cost-effective model of care.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.251 · 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