MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1718606456 · doi:10.1111/hdi.12085

Changing the hemodialysis prescription for hemodialysis patients with subdural and intracranial hemorrhage

2013· review· en· W1718606456 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrew Davenport

Bibliographic record

VenueHemodialysis International · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemodialysisDialysisMedical prescriptionIntracranial pressureHematomaRenal replacement therapyCerebral perfusion pressureIntensive care unitNeurointensive careIntracerebral hemorrhageSurgeryIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaGlasgow Coma ScaleCerebral blood flow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although continuous modalities of renal replacement therapy offer an advantage to the patient with compromised cerebral perfusion and intracranial hypertension, they are generally limited to the intensive care unit setting. Many hemodialysis patients admitted with strokes and subdural hematoma are managed on general wards. As such, these patients are generally treated by intermittent hemodialysis, and their dialysis prescription should be altered to minimize changes in serum osmolality, and fall in blood pressure during dialysis. Such patients require more frequent but shorter dialysis sessions, using minimally bioincompatible small surface area dialyzers with lower blood flows, in combination with higher sodium and cooled dialysate. In patients at risk of intracranial hemorrhage and those with invasive intracranial monitoring, systemic anticoagulants should be avoided, choosing no anticoagulation protocols or regional anticoagulants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemodialysis InternationalSame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207