Associations among nocturnal sleep, daytime intradialytic sleep, and mortality risk in patients on daytime conventional hemodialysis: <scp>US R</scp>enal <scp>D</scp>ata <scp>S</scp>ystem special study data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fragmented nocturnal sleep is commonly reported by patients undergoing daytime conventional hemodialysis (CHD) and may be associated with higher mortality risk. Subjective sleepiness during CHD is also frequently observed. We examined the association of reported sleep fragmentation and nocturnal and daytime (intradialytic) sleep durations with survival in a national cohort of 1440 CHD patients who were interviewed in 2005-2007 in a phone survey conducted by the US Renal Data System. Patient survival was followed through September 30, 2010 in the US Renal Data System. A total of 76% of patients reported that they typically dozed off or slept during their treatment, and intradialytic dozing was especially common among patients whose treatment shift started before 1000 hours. There was a trend for patients who reported dozing during CHD to report nocturnal sleep fragmentation (60.4% vs. 55.1%; P = 0.07). With adjustment for intradialytic sleep and other covariates, nocturnal sleep fragmentation was not associated with survival. Mortality risk was higher for patients who reported sleeping 9 or more hours/night compared with the referent category of nocturnal sleep equal to 6-7 hours (hazard ratio: 1.50 [95% confidence interval: 1.04-2.17]; P = 0.03). Continued investigation of the association of timing and duration of sleep with hemodialysis patient outcomes is warranted.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".