Care Processes and Clinical Responses to Newly Detected Albuminuria: The Stockholm Creatinine Measurements (SCREAM) Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Albuminuria is a predictor of adverse health outcomes. Early detection enables timely clinical management, yet little is known about how clinicians respond to newly detected albuminuria in routine practice. This study characterized clinical care processes for patients with newly detected albuminuria. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, population-based cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 215,035 adults with newly detected albuminuria between 2010 and 2021 in Stockholm, Sweden. EXPOSURE: Albuminuria severity, categorized as moderate (≥30-299 mg/g), severe (300-999 mg/g), or very severe (≥1000 mg/g). All methods of albuminuria testing were considered: dipstick albuminuria or proteinuria tests as well as 24-hour and spot albumin concentrations. OUTCOME: Proportion of patients retested for albuminuria, frequency of the methods used for retesting, rates of nephrology referral, and rates of initiation of treatment with renin angiotensin system or sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Descriptive analysis of proportions and cumulative incidence of outcomes based on time-to-event analysis accounting for the competing risks of death and kidney failure. RESULTS: We found 90% of participants had moderate, 8% had severe, and 2% had very severe albuminuria. Retesting rates within 1 year were 46%, ranging from 45% for moderate albuminuria to 70% for very severe albuminuria, with lower rates among individuals without diabetes. Only 28% of those with an indication were referred to a nephrologist, and renin angiotensin system and sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor initiation rates at 1 year were 10%, 12%, and 37% for moderate, severe, and very severe albuminuria, respectively, with substantially lower rates in individuals without diabetes. LIMITATIONS: The findings are specific to Stockholm's health care system and may not be generalizable to other regions, health care models, or cultures. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified important care gaps in the Swedish management of albuminuria. A substantial proportion of individuals, including those with very severe albuminuria, lacked monitoring and failed to receive antiproteinuric treatments. Strategies to improve clinician awareness and adherence to guideline-recommended care may mitigate the long-term consequences of chronic kidney disease progression. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Early signs of kidney damage, such as albuminuria (protein in the urine) may not always lead to the appropriate clinical follow-up that is recommended in clinical practice guidelines. This study characterized how patients with albuminuria were managed in Stockholm's health care environment. Between 2010 and 2021, 215,035 adults had elevated albuminuria detected for the first time, but many did not receive the recommended follow-up care, including a confirmation test, referral to a nephrologist when indicated, or initiation of kidney-protective medications. This study highlights the need for better strategies to improve care for individuals with albuminuria, ensuring earlier intervention that may prevent more severe health consequences of early indications of kidney damage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".