MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1544849443 · doi:10.1159/000329401

Renal Replacement Therapy: When to Start

2011· review· en· W1544849443 on OpenAlexafffund
Sean M. Bagshaw, Ron Wald

Bibliographic record

VenueContributions to nephrology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Alberta Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsRenal replacement therapyMedicineIntensive care medicineCritically illAcute kidney injuryIdeal (ethics)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critically ill patients whose course is complicated by acute kidney injury (AKI) often commence renal replacement therapy (RRT). For these patients, initiation of RRT results in a measurable escalation in both the complexity and associated costs of care. While RRT is commonly used in critical care practice, there is uncertainty about the ideal circumstances for the initiation of RRT. This decision is naturally complex and is influenced by numerous factors, including those that are patient-specific, clinician-specific and those related to local logistics. Survey data have clearly shown marked heterogeneity between clinicians and across jurisdictions for the initiation of RRT. As a consequence, analysis of ideal circumstances under which to initiate RRT is challenging and there is currently no broad consensus to guide clinicians on this issue. In this review, we discuss the theoretical benefits and risks of earlier, as compared to later initiation RRT, the accumulated data, and future directions for investigation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContributions to nephrologySame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207