MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6959163816 · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2020933

Frailty as a Predictor of Negative Health Outcomes in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W6959163816 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

VenueLanzhou University Institutional Repository · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKidney diseaseHazard ratioConfidence intervalCohortCohort studyCase fatality rateQuality of life (healthcare)Meta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To perform a comprehensive evidence synthesis to summarize the impact of frailty on health outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Design: Systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Setting: Electronic searches in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, CBM, and Wanfang Database were performed. The methodological quality was evaluated using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS). Participants: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Measurements: Potential clinical outcomes due to frailty. Results: Eighteen cohort studies incorporating a total of 22,788 participants were included. The overall risk of bias was low. The median reported prevalence of frail and prefrail individuals with CKD was 41.8% (range 2.8-81.5%) and 43.9% (range 19.1-62.7%), respectively. Prefrailty and frailty related to mortality indicated an increased hazard ratio (HR), with a pooled HR of 1.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.46-1.94P<01] and 1.48 (95% CI 1.21-1.81P<01), respectively. Prefrailty and frailty related to hospitalization with the pooled HR/risk ratio (RR) of 1.56 (95% CI 1.37-1.76P<01) and 1.21 (95% CI 0.79-1.85P = .38), respectively. Similarly, the pooled HR demonstrated a strong correlation between frailty and falls in patients with CKD with HR 1.83 (95% CI 1.40-2.37P<01) and no statistical correlation between prefrailty and falls in these patients with pooled HR 1.19 (95% CI 0.44-3.22P = .73), respectively. Conclusions and Implications: Frailty is predictive of negative outcomes in patients with CKD, including all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, and falls. Therefore, frailty should be routinely assessed among patients with CKD to prevent poor prognosis, reduce fatality rate, and provide evidence to support future targeted interventions. However, because of the limited amount of information currently in the literature, additional prospective studies are needed to explore the role of prefrailty in predicting adverse outcomes for patients with CKD. (C) 2020 AMDA - The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.325
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