Development and Validation of a Predictive Risk Algorithm for Bleeding in Individuals on Long-term Hemodialysis: An International Prospective Cohort Study (BLEED-HD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:Individuals with kidney disease are at a high risk of bleeding and as such tools that identify those at highest risk may aid mitigation strategies.Objective:We set out to develop and validate a prediction equation (BLEED-HD) to identify patients on maintenance hemodialysis at high risk of bleeding.Design:International prospective cohort study (development); retrospective cohort study (validation).Settings:Development: 15 countries (Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study [DOPPS] phase 2-6 from 2002 to 2018); Validation: Ontario, Canada.Patients:Development: 53 147 patients; Validation: 19 318 patients.Measurements:Hospitalization for a bleeding event.Methods:Cox proportional hazards models.Results:Among the DOPPS cohort (mean age, 63.7 years; female, 39.7%), a bleeding event occurred in 2773 patients (5.2%, event rate 32 per 1000 person-years), with a median follow-up of 1.6 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.9-2.1) years. BLEED-HD included 6 variables: age, sex, country, previous gastrointestinal bleeding, prosthetic heart valve, and vitamin K antagonist use. The observed 3-year probability of bleeding by deciles of risk ranged from 2.2% to 10.8%. Model discrimination was low to moderate (c-statistic = 0.65) with excellent calibration (Brier score range = 0.036-0.095). Discrimination and calibration of BLEED-HD were similar in an external validation of 19 318 patients from Ontario, Canada. Compared to existing bleeding scores, BLEED-HD demonstrated better discrimination and calibration (c-statistic: HEMORRHAGE = 0.59, HAS-BLED = 0.59, and ATRIA = 0.57, c-stat difference, net reclassification index [NRI], and integrated discrimination index [IDI] all <i>P</i> value <.0001).Limitations:Dialysis procedure anticoagulation was not available; validation cohort was considerably older than the development cohort.Conclusion:In patients on maintenance hemodialysis, BLEED-HD is a simple risk equation that may be more applicable than existing risk tools in predicting the risk of bleeding in this high-risk population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".