Citrate Formulation Determines Filter Lifespan during Continuous Veno-Venous Hemofiltration: A Prospective Cohort Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We conducted an 8-month prospective single-center observational study in patients with acute kidney injury treated with continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) to compare the impact of two citrate formulations on filter lifespan (FLS). METHODS: Patients received CVVH at a delivered dose of 25 ml/kg/h. Multivariable linear regression was performed to assess the influence of different variables on circuit lifespan. RESULTS: We included 59 patients, 28 received the 10/2 formulation and 31 received the 18/0 formulation. Median (interquartile range) FLS was significantly prolonged with the 18/0 solution compared with the 10/2 solution (4.10 (2.45-5.75) vs. 2.68 (0.47-4.99) days, p = 0.001). No confounding variables (difference in ionized calcium target, citrate flow or dose, platelet count, hematocrit, vascular access location) affecting filter capacity or lifespan between the 2 formulations were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Under similar conditions of CVVH and calcium targets, a Prismocitrate 18/0 formulation significantly improved FLS as compared with Prismocitrate 10/2.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it