MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7065174820

Early Postoperative Serum Cystatin C Predicts Severe Acute Kidney Injury Following Pediatric Cardiac Surgery

2011· article· en· W7065174820 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenCommons - UConn (University of Connecticut) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsAcute kidney injuryCystatin CRenal functionCardiac surgeryIntensive care unitOdds ratioCreatinine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

n this multicenter, prospective study of 288 children (half under 2 years of age) undergoing cardiac surgery, we evaluated whether the measurement of pre- and postoperative serum cystatin C (CysC) improves the prediction of acute kidney injury (AKI) over that obtained by serum creatinine (SCr). Higher preoperative SCr-based estimated glomerular filtration rates predicted higher risk of the postoperative primary outcomes of stage 1 and 2 AKI (adjusted odds ratios (ORs) 1.5 and 1.9, respectively). Preoperative CysC was not associated with AKI. The highest quintile of postoperative (within 6 h) CysC predicted stage 1 and 2 AKI (adjusted ORs of 6 and 17.2, respectively). The highest tertile of percent change in CysC independently predicted AKI, whereas the highest tertile of SCr predicted stage 1 but not stage 2 AKI. Postoperative CysC levels independently predicted longer duration of ventilation and intensive care unit length of stay, whereas the postoperative SCr change only predicted longer intensive care unit stay. Thus, postoperative serum CysC is useful to risk-stratify patients for AKI treatment trials. More research, however, is needed to understand the relation between preoperative renal function and the risk of AK

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenCommons - UConn (University of Connecticut)Same topicParticle Detector Development and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207