MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6926404967 · doi:10.25384/sage.c.4855050

Perceived and Objective Kidney Disease Knowledge in Patients With Advanced CKD Followed in a Multidisciplinary CKD Clinic

2020· other· en· W6926404967 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKidney diseaseMultidisciplinary approachDiseaseKnowledge levelKidneyDementiaMultidisciplinary team

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background:One of the key components of multidisciplinary CKD clinics is education; however, kidney disease knowledge among patients followed in these clinics is not routinely measured.Objective:The aim of this study was to determine objective and perceived kidney disease knowledge and patient characteristics associated with knowledge among patients followed in a multi-care kidney clinic.Design:This is a cross-sectional survey study.Setting:This study was conducted in a multi-care kidney clinic in Ontario, Canada.Patients:Patients who did not speak English, who were unable to read due to significant vision impairment, or who had a known history of dementia or significant cognitive impairment were excluded.Measurements:Perceived kidney disease knowledge was evaluated using a previously validated 9-item survey (PiKS). Each question on the perceived knowledge survey had 4 possible responses, ranging from “I don’t know anything” (1) to “I know a lot” (4). Objective kidney disease knowledge was evaluated using a previously validated survey (KiKS).Methods:The association between patient characteristics and perceived and objective kidney disease knowledge was determined using linear regression.Results:A total of 125 patients were included, 57% were male, the mean (SD) age and eGFR were 66 (13) years and 16 (5.9) mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup>, respectively. The median (IQR) objective and perceived knowledge survey scores were 19 out of 27 (16, 21) and 2.9 out of 4 (2.4, 3.2), respectively. Only 25% of patients answered correctly that CKD can be associated with no symptoms, and 64% of patients identified correctly that the kidneys make urine. More than 60% of patients perceived themselves to know nothing or only a little about medications that help or hurt the kidney. Older age was independently associated with lower perceived and objective knowledge, but sex, income, and educational attainment were not.Limitations:This is a single-center study. Cognitive impairment was based on the treating team’s informal assessment or prior documentation in the chart; formal cognitive testing was not performed as part of this study.Conclusions:Despite resource-intensive care, CKD knowledge of patients followed in a multidisciplinary clinic was found to be modest. Whether enhanced educational strategies can improve knowledge and whether increasing knowledge improves patient outcomes warrants further study.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.271 · 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