MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7080242831

Marcadores tempranos en el diagnóstico de la enfermedad renal crónica en pacientes diabéticos e hipertensos: Revisión bibliográfica

2025· article· en· W7080242831 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDialnet (Universidad de la Rioja) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlbuminuriaRenal functionKidney diseaseCystatin CDiseaseIncidence (geometry)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic kidney disease affects 10% of the world's population, with a higher incidence in diabetics and hypertensive patients due to endothelial damage and inflammation. Diagnosis is based on a glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min/1.73 m² or markers such as albuminuria. Early detection is key, and early biomarkers such as cystatin C, neutrophil lipocalin gelatinase-associated protein, and cell membrane glycoprotein have demonstrated greater sensitivity. This study is a descriptive and analytical analysis, using a systematic review design, and analyzing literature from scientific databases such as PubMed, SciELO, Google Scholar, and Elsevier. Recent articles in Spanish, English, and Portuguese were included, ensuring ethical principles according to the Vancouver Standards. The studies analyzed highlight that microalbuminuria, serum creatinine, and glomerular filtration rate are the main parameters used to diagnose kidney disease in diabetic patients. The study has demonstrated the effectiveness of various biomarkers for the early diagnosis of chronic kidney disease, although albuminuria remains the most widely used marker due to its easy accessibility.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0370.027
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDialnet (Universidad de la Rioja)→Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→