Effect of dialysis dose and membrane flux on hemoglobin cycling in hemodialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies found that hemoglobin (Hb) fluctuation was closely related to the prognosis of the maintenance hemodialysis patients. We investigated the association of factors relating dialysis dose and dialyzer membrane with Hb levels. We undertook a randomized clinical trial in 140 patients undergoing thrice-weekly dialysis and assigned patients randomly to a standard or high dose of dialysis; Hb level was measured every month for 12 months. In the standard-dose group, the mean (±SD) urea reduction ratio was 65.1% ± 7.3%, the single-pool Kt/V was 1.26 ± 0.11, and the equilibrated Kt/V was 1.05 ± 0.09; in the high-dose group, the values were 73.5% ± 8.7%, 1.68 ± 0.15, and 1.47 ± 0.11, respectively. The standard deviation (SD) and residual SD (liner regression of Hb) values of Hb were significantly higher in the standard-dose group and low-flux group. The percentage achievement of target Hb in the high-dose dialysis group and high-flux dialyzer group was significantly higher than the standard-dose group and low-flux group, respectively. Patients undergoing hemodialysis thrice weekly appear to have benefit from a higher dialysis dose than that recommended by current KDQQI (Kidney Disease Qutcome Quality Initiative) guidelines or from the use of a high-flux membrane, which is in favor of maintaining stable Hb levels.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".