Home hemodialysis and conventional in‐center hemodialysis in <scp>J</scp>apan: A comparison of health‐related quality of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important measure of how disease affects patients' daily life. Conventional in-center hemodialysis (CHD) patients have been found to have decreased HRQOL. Recent study reported that at-home hemodialysis (HHD) improved the long-term HRQOL compared with CHD; however, there have been no data from Japanese HHD patients. A sample of 80 Japanese hemodialysis patients (46 HHD and 34 CHD) was matched for age, sex, and cause of end-stage renal disease. Patient HRQOL was measured using two health surveys: Medical Outcomes Study 36 Item Short Form Health Survey-Version 2 and Kidney Disease Quality of Life-Short Form. HHD patients reported better scores on seven out of eight domains (all domains except general heath) of the Medical Outcomes Study 36 Item Short Form Health Survey-Version 2, as well as better Kidney Disease Quality of Life-Short Form scores with respect to symptoms and problems, effect of kidney disease, and work status. No significant differences were observed for burden of kidney disease, cognitive function, quality of social interaction, sexual function, or sleep. More than 65% of HHD patients stated that they were not bothered at all by limitations on food and water intake. Japanese HHD patients demonstrate significantly higher HRQOL scores. However, while their HRQOL and employment rate were high and they were able to enjoy fewer dietary restrictions, kidney disease remained a great burden.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".