Association between initial type of hemodialysis access used in the elderly and mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We hypothesized that certain subpopulations (elderly and those with greater comorbidity) may not have significant benefit from "fistula first" initiative. A cohort of incident hemodialysis patients from 2005 to 2007, who were ≥70 years old, was derived from the United States Renal Data System. Primary variable of interest was type of vascular access used at first outpatient hemodialysis (i.e., fistula, graft, or central catheter), with primary outcome of all-cause mortality (time to death measured from the first outpatient hemodialysis). A cohort of 82,202 patients was stratified by age (70 to ≤80, 81 to ≤90, and >90). Each group demonstrated a survival benefit with the use of an arterio-venous fistula compared with catheter (hazard ratio [HR] 0.56 [P < 0.001], HR 0.55 [P < 0.001], and HR 0.69 [P = 0.007], respectively). Comparing graft to with a catheter, both groups, 70 to ≤80 and 81 to ≤90, had significant benefit compared with catheter (HR 0.73, P < 0.001 and HR 0.74, P < 0.001, respectively). However, significance was lost in those ≥90 (HR 0.83, P = 0.354). When substratified by comorbidity, those 81 to ≤90 years old with a history of malignancy or peripheral vascular disease also did not reach significant benefit compared with a catheter (HR 0.88, P = 0.423 and HR 0.85, P = 0.221, respectively). While specific subgroups in the hemodialysis population exist where use of fistulas and grafts at time of dialysis initiation is not of proven statistical benefit to survival, elderly hemodialysis patients with comorbidities still appear to benefit from the use of fistulas and grafts.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".