Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36008537›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

An early prediction model for canine chronic kidney disease based on routine clinical laboratory tests.

Yiannis Kokkinos, JoAnn Morrison, Richard Bradley, Theodoros Panagiotakos, Jennifer Ogeer, Dennis Chew, Ciaran O'Flynn, Geert De Meyer, Phillip Watson, Ilias Tagkopoulos

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yiannis Kokkinos *Process Integration and Predictive Analytics, PIPA LLC, Davis, CA, USA.
JoAnn Morrison *Banfield Pet Hospital, Vancouver, WA, USA.
Richard BradleyWALTHAM Petcare Science Institute, Freeby Lane, Waltham on the Wolds, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, LE14 4RT, UK.
Theodoros PanagiotakosProcess Integration and Predictive Analytics, PIPA LLC, Davis, CA, USA.
Jennifer OgeerAntech Diagnostics, 17620 Mount Herrmann Street, Fountain Valley, CA, USA.
Dennis ChewCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Ciaran O'FlynnWALTHAM Petcare Science Institute, Freeby Lane, Waltham on the Wolds, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, LE14 4RT, UK.
Geert De MeyerWALTHAM Petcare Science Institute, Freeby Lane, Waltham on the Wolds, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, LE14 4RT, UK.
Phillip WatsonWALTHAM Petcare Science Institute, Freeby Lane, Waltham on the Wolds, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, LE14 4RT, UK. Phillip.Watson@effem.com.
Ilias TagkopoulosProcess Integration and Predictive Analytics, PIPA LLC, Davis, CA, USA.
Predictive Science (United States) · USThe Ohio State University · USUniversity of California, Davis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to derive a model to predict the risk of dogs developing chronic kidney disease (CKD) using data from electronic health records (EHR) collected during routine veterinary practice. Data from 57,402 dogs were included in the study. Two thirds of the EHRs were used to build the model, which included feature selection and identification of the optimal neural network type and architecture. The remaining unseen EHRs were used to evaluate model performance. The final model was a recurrent neural network with 6 features (creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, urine specific gravity, urine protein, weight, age). Identifying CKD at the time of diagnosis, the model displayed a sensitivity of 91.4% and a specificity of 97.2%. When predicting future risk of CKD, model sensitivity was 68.8% at 1 year, and 44.8% 2 years before diagnosis. Positive predictive value (PPV) varied between 15 and 23% and was influenced by the age of the patient, while the negative predictive value remained above 99% under all tested conditions. While the modest PPV limits its use as a stand-alone diagnostic screening tool, high specificity and NPV make the model particularly effective at identifying patients that will not go on to develop CKD.

Indexed as

Laboratories, ClinicalRenal Insufficiency, ChronicAnimalsBlood Urea NitrogenCreatinineDogsPredictive Value of TestsCreatinine

Identifiers

PMID36008537
PMCPMC9411602
OpenAlexW4293089262

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.