MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415425850 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfaf116.0481

#2711 Geriatric assessment use to frailty prediction in older CKD patients

2025· article· en· W4415425850 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ana Farinha, Filipa Trigo, Cátia Figueiredo, Patrícia Valério

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKidney diseaseNephrologyFrailty IndexDemographicsFrailty syndromeActivities of daily livingMultidisciplinary approach

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and Aims Frailty is common among chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. The 2024 KDIGO guidelines recommend identifying frailty as a key factor in CKD management. The Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) is the gold-standard methodology used by geriatricians to define frailty. Our aim was to identify predictors of frailty in CKD patients, using CGA methodology. Method We evaluated 204 patients aged ≥65 years in 2024: 111 with CKD stages 3 to 5, 71 on dialysis, and 22 receiving conservative care in a single nephrology unit. A multidisciplinary team, including a nephrologist specialized in geriatrics, conducted the CGA. Data collection included demographics and clinical parameters, as well as assessments of activities of daily living (ADL), cognitive function, nutritional status, mobility, and social support. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS v.29. Results Among the 204 patients, the mean age was 79.1 (±7.2) years, 58.2% were male, 32.7% were widowed, and 28% were institutionalized, 52.5% had diabetes, and 27.7% had heart failure. Overall, 25% of patients were classified as frail based on the CGA. Frailty prevalence varied depending on the assessment tool used: 26.5% according to the Fried Index (FI >3), 23.5% according to the Edmonton Frailty Scale (EFS >8), and 58.3% according to the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS >5). Frailty prevalence also differed across CKD stages (Table 1). Logistic regression identified four significant predictors of frailty: activities of daily livings [(Barthel Index (Exp(B) = 0.191, P < 0.001), Lawton and Brody Scale (Exp(B) = 0.145, P = 0.001)], mobility [Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) (Exp(B) = 0.575, P = 0.001)] and depression (Exp(B) = 21.057, P = 0.013). The model showed an excellent fit (Nagelkerke's R² = 0.835, 92.3% accuracy). Conclusion Frailty identification has a significant impact on CKD management. Simple, time-efficient tools should be integrated into routine care to facilitate early detection and intervention. The EFS may be particularly useful due to its shorter administration time while maintaining alignment with CGA results. Identifying frailty syndromes such as impaired mobility (SPPB) and depression could help target modifiable risk factors and improve patient outcomes. Conversely, declines in ADL function, while strong frailty predictors, may indicate a stage too advanced for effective intervention. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate frailty across the full CKD continuum, from early to advanced stages, and to identify predictors that may be relevant across all CKD stages.

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)0.007
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207