Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the last decade, the number of patients starting renal replacement therapy has increased for all ages, but the increase for patients over 65 years old has been particularly dramatic. Objective: The aim of our study was the analysis of the outcome of all the patients who were over 65 years of age at the time they started chronic hemodialysis, in our Center (n, 52). Methods: A total of 76 patients were treated by the chronic hemodialysis program of 251 Hellenic Air Force and VA General Hospital, between 1992 and 2002, while totally 309 patients were offered dialysis at this time. We found that 52 of them (68.4%) were over 65 years old [40 male (76.9%), 12 female (23.1%)]. Results: Elderly patients manifest more often intradialytic complications, such as hypotensive episodes (28.8%) and arrhythmias (23.1%), due to their hemodynamic instability. Polypharmacy is a big deal for dialysis patients, especially elderly ones. Each patient was taking 9.1 PO and 1.9 IV medications on average, per day. Most of them (84.6%) required recombinant human erythropoietin. The most common co‐morbid factors we observed in this population were cardiovascular diseases (36.5%), neurological problems, respiratory failure, bone disease, malignancy (17.3%), depression, malnutrition, and infections (30.8%). Deaths were often associated with more than one morbid factors. Survival and the quality of life in the elderly patients on hemodialysis are frequently acceptable. The 1, 3 and 5‐year patient survival rates during 1990–2000 were 63.4%, 56.1%, and 26.8%. Conclusion: We believe that if there are no extracontraindications, elderly patients can benefit from hemodialysis, taking into consideration that we should adapt the therapy to the geriatric special needs.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".