ArticleClinical and experimental nephrology2024
External validation of the pediatric International IgA Nephropathy Prediction Tool in a central China cohort.
Article in Clinical and experimental nephrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Novel therapies improve prognosis of IgAN and limit the applicability of the International IgA Nephropathy Prediction Tool.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to externally validate the pediatric International IgA Nephropathy (IgAN) Prediction Tool updated from the adult IgAN Prediction Tool.
methods439 children with biopsy-confirmed idiopathic IgAN were enrolled in this external validation study. The primary outcome was a 30% decline in eGFR or end-stage kidney disease. We evaluated the discrimination using Harrell's C-index, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and Kaplan-Meier curves for four risk groups (< 16th [low risk], ∼16 to < 50th [intermediate risk], ∼50 to < 84th [high risk], and ≥ 84th percentiles [highest risk] of linear predictor). Calibration was assessed using calibration plots.
resultsThe median follow-up time of the 439 patients was 4.5 (2.7-6.8) years, and 27 patients reached the primary outcome. Compared with the reported cohorts, our cohort was more contemporary, with milder proteinuria at biopsy, and had lower proportions of S1 and T1 lesions. Harrell's C-index and area under the ROC curve at 5 years were < 0.7 for both the models with and without race. The Kaplan-Meier curves of the risk groups were not well separated for the two models, only separated completely between the highest-risk group and the others for the model without race. The two models generally overestimated the risk of the primary outcome,
conclusionThe model without race could accurately distinguish the highest-risk patients from patients with low, intermediate, and high risk for kidney progression. Discrimination and calibration for the full model with or without race were unsatisfactory in this contemporary cohort in central China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37713045What 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.