ArticleKidney research and clinical practice2022
External validation of the international prediction tool in Korean patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy.
Article in Kidney research and clinical practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies for mitigating artificial intelligence bias in healthcare: a systematic review.JAMIA open · 2026Review
- Chromatin accessibility of circulating CD8⁺ T cells differentiates disease severity in IgA nephropathy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Factors associated with pauci-immune glomerulonephritis in patients undergoing kidney biopsy with positive anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody results.Journal of nephrology · 2025Article
- Conventional machine learning-based prediction models did not outperform the International IgA Nephropathy Prediction Tool.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2025Article
- Novel therapies improve prognosis of IgAN and limit the applicability of the International IgA Nephropathy Prediction Tool.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
- Validation of 2 Prognostic Models to Predict Renal Allograft Outcome After IgA Nephropathy Recurrence.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Machine learning-based 2-year risk prediction tool in immunoglobulin A nephropathy.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2024Article
- Machine learning-based diagnosis and prognosis of IgAN: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Heliyon · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe International IgA Nephropathy Prediction Tool has been recently developed to estimate the progression risk of immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical performance of this prediction tool in a large IgAN cohort in Korea.
methodsThe study cohort was comprised of 2,064 patients with biopsy-proven IgAN from four medical centers between March 2012 and September 2021. We calculated the predicted risk for each patient. The primary outcome was occurrence of a 50% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) from the time of biopsy or end-stage kidney disease. The model performance was evaluated for discrimination, calibration, and reclassification. We also constructed and tested an additional model with a new coefficient for the Korean race.
resultsDuring a median follow-up period of 3.8 years (interquartile range, 1.8-6.6 years), 363 patients developed the primary outcome. The two prediction models exhibited good discrimination power, with a C-statistic of 0.81. The two models generally underestimated the risk of the primary outcome, with lesser underestimation for the model with race. The model with race showed better performance in reclassification compared to the model without race (net reclassification index, 0.13). The updated model with the Korean coefficient showed good agreement between predicted risk and observed outcome.
conclusionIn Korean IgAN patients, International IgA Nephropathy Prediction Tool had good discrimination power but underestimated the risk of progression. The updated model with the Korean coefficient showed acceptable calibration and warrants external validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.