MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097060242

Predictors of Medication Adherence in Renal Transplant Patients: Self-Efficacy, Depressive Symptoms, and Cognition.

2016· article· en· W7097060242 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedication adherenceKidney diseaseKidney transplantCognitionKidney transplantationDiseaseRenal transplantDepressive symptoms
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic Kidney disease (CKD) is relatively common among middle-aged and older adults. Just under 1000 people with CKD received kidney transplants in Canada in 2005, while three times that remained on waitlists. Studies report high rates of non-adherence to medications following renal transplant. The extent to which adherence is predicted by cognitive ability, depressive symptoms and self-efficacy, is an important issue in management of this illness. Research is needed to further understand how these variables are related to medication adherence in renal transplant patients. This project will examine the relationships between traditional and everyday measures of cognitive performance, general and medication adherence-specific self-efficacy, depressive symptoms, and medication adherence, in persons post renal transplant. Specifically, we are interested in how each of the aforementioned factors collectively contribute to medication adherence in these patients. We plan to use structural equation modeling techniques to statistically examine data collected in each of these domains, in hopes of better understanding the relationships between them.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments→French-language works237,207→