MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Overcoming Barriers to Arteriovenous Fistula Creation and Use

2003· review· en· W1546106966 on OpenAlexaff
Charmaine E. Lok, Matthew J. Oliver

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Dialysis · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArteriovenous fistulaDialysisVascular accessReferralNephrologyHemodialysisFistulaComorbidityHemodialysis accessIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineSurgeryInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

National guidelines advocate the placement of arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) as the preferred vascular access for hemodialysis (HD) patients because of their low complication rate, lower costs, and prolonged patency, once matured. The current Dialysis Outcomes Quality Initiative (DOQI) guidelines aim for an AVF incidence of 50% and a 40% prevalence in the United States. Although patients currently starting dialysis do so at an increasingly older age and with more comorbidity, they should be given every opportunity to receive an AVF. Meeting this challenge is facilitated by a multidisciplinary approach with early referral to the nephrologist in the predialysis period for access planning. Key components of a vascular access program may include the coordination by a dedicated access coordinator and outcome tracking via a prospective database. Preoperative vessel evaluation and careful selection of an appropriate surgical site, along with an experienced surgeon, improve surgical outcomes. Transposed brachiobasilic or other tertiary fistulas should be offered to patients who cannot receive a native radiocephalic or brachiocephalic fistula. The ability to routinely monitor and salvage failing AVFs is important to achieving successful AVF outcomes. Standardized definitions of AVF outcomes are important to allow individual centers and continuous quality assurance (CQA) programs to track and benchmark their outcomes against local and national standards to help them meet recommended targets.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.337 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations79
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in DialysisSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207