Perihospitalization patterns of hemoglobin levels and erythropoiesis‐stimulating agent doses in <scp>US</scp> hemodialysis patients, 1998–2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anemia management in hemodialysis patients is of primary importance for clinicians and dialysis providers. Through a retrospective claims analysis, we studied prevalent US hemodialysis patients 1998-2009, and examined patterns of hemoglobin levels and erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA, epoetin [EPO], and darbepoetin [DPO] ) doses surrounding hospitalization events. Medicare outpatient claims were used to determine monthly ESA doses and associated hemoglobin levels. ESA dose trajectories were defined with repeated measures models incorporating an autoregressive covariance matrix that compared subsequent measurements with the index month of hospitalization, with variance component covariance matrices chosen for pair-wise comparisons. Regarding prehospitalization hemoglobin levels, a biphasic pattern occurred in both the EPO (1998-2009, n = 161,242) and DPO (2004-2009, n = 4391) populations; levels rose from 1998 to 2004, fell thereafter in the EPO population, and fell after 2006 or 2007 in the DPO population. In the EPO population, the proportions of patients with hemoglobin less than 10 g/dL were 30.1% in 1998, 14.5% in 2004, and 28.3% in 2009; corresponding values for the DPO population were 21.0% in 2004 and 31.6% in 2009. While some degree of year-to-year variability occurred, EPO dose trends were less pronounced, with an apparent peak in 2004 followed by a modest decline; trends were similar for DPO. Trends in EPO dose trajectories did not completely parallel those for hemoglobin level; while EPO doses increased yearly up to 2004, doses stabilized, but did not materially decrease after 2004. No definite annual trends for DPO dose trajectories were apparent.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".