The McGill Geriatric Lithium-Induced Diabetes Insipidus Clinical Study (McGLIDICS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Despite being a common and potentially serious condition, nephrogenic diabetes insipidus (NDI) remains poorly understood in older lithium users. Our main objective was to compare the prevalence of NDI symptoms and decreased urine osmolality ([UOsm] < 300 milli-Osmoles [mOsm/kg]) among geriatric and adult lithium users. We also assessed NDI symptoms, serum sodium (Na+), and urine specific gravity (USG) as possible surrogate measures of decreased UOsm, and ascertained whether potential etiologic factors independently correlated with decreased UOsm. METHOD: This was a cross-sectional study of 100 consecutive outpatients treated with lithium from 6 tertiary care clinics, of which 45 were geriatric (aged 65 years and older) and 55 adult (aged 18 to 64 years). Patients completed a symptom questionnaire and underwent laboratory tests, including UOsm, serum Na+, and USG. RESULTS: Geriatric and adult lithium users had similar rates of decreased UOsm (12.5%, compared with 17.9%, P = 0.74), but geriatric patients reported less symptoms (P < 0.05). Although UOsm did not correlate with symptoms or current serum Na+, USG of less than 1.010 was suggestive of UOsm of less than 300 mOsm/kg. Age, lithium duration, and serum lithium level were independently associated with UOsm. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of decreased UOsm is similar in geriatric and adult lithium users, but older patients are less likely to report urinary and thirst symptoms. Although subjective symptoms do not correlate with UOsm, USG may be a cost-efficient clinical surrogate measure for UOsm. We suggest clinicians increase their vigilance for decreased UOsm, especially in lithium users with advanced age, longer duration of lithium exposure, and higher lithium levels. This may potentially prevent lithium intoxication, falls, hypernatremic events, and renal dysfunction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".