Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26925247›Full record

ReviewCanadian journal of kidney health and disease2016

Utilizing electronic health records to predict acute kidney injury risk and outcomes: workgroup statements from the 15(th) ADQI Consensus Conference.

Scott M Sutherland, Lakhmir S Chawla, Sandra L Kane-Gill, Raymond K Hsu, Andrew A Kramer, Stuart L Goldstein, John A Kellum, Claudio Ronco, Sean M Bagshaw, 15 ADQI Consensus Group

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Canadian journal of kidney health and disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Clinical prediction models for acute kidney injury.Revista Brasileira de terapia intensiva · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Prediction differences and implications of acute kidney injury with and without urine output criteria in adult critically ill patients.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Scott M SutherlandDivision of Nephrology, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Room G-306, Stanford, CA 94304 USA.
Lakhmir S ChawlaDepartments of Medicine and Critical Care, George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, DC USA.
Sandra L Kane-GillDepartments of Pharmacy, Critical Care Medicine and Clinical Translational Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Raymond K HsuDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA USA.
Andrew A KramerPrescient Healthcare Consulting, LLC, Charlottesville, VA USA.
Stuart L GoldsteinDivision of Pediatric Nephrology, Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH USA.
John A KellumDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Claudio RoncoDepartment of Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, International Renal Research Institute of Vicenza, San Bortolo Hospital, Vicenza, Italy.
Sean M BagshawDivision of Critical Care, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
15 ADQI Consensus Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The data contained within the electronic health record (EHR) is "big" from the standpoint of volume, velocity, and variety. These circumstances and the pervasive trend towards EHR adoption have sparked interest in applying big data predictive analytic techniques to EHR data. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a condition well suited to prediction and risk forecasting; not only does the consensus definition for AKI allow temporal anchoring of events, but no treatments exist once AKI develops, underscoring the importance of early identification and prevention. The Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) convened a group of key opinion leaders and stakeholders to consider how best to approach AKI research and care in the "Big Data" era. This manuscript addresses the core elements of AKI risk prediction and outlines potential pathways and processes. We describe AKI prediction targets, feature selection, model development, and data display.

Indexed as

Acute kidney injuryBig dataElectronic health recordElectronic medical recordPredictionPredictive analytics

Identifiers

PMID26925247
PMCPMC4768420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.