Peritonitis Prevention in CAPD: To Mask or Not?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of wearing a face mask to prevent peritonitis during continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) bag exchange. SETTING: Renal unit at a university hospital. PATIENTS: Two groups of patients on CAPD were compared: those performing bag exchange with (n = 24) and those without a face mask (n = 40). OUTCOMES: Occurrence of first episode of peritonitis and total number of episodes. RESULTS: No difference was found between groups with respect to probability of developing the first episode of peritonitis (p = 0.757). Patients holding university degrees had evidence of protection, with borderline significance [relative risk (RR) 0.52; confidence interval (CI) 95%, 0.23 -1.18; p= 0.109]. Cox's proportional hazard regression analysis also demonstrated a significant protective factor for patients with university level education (RR 0.42; Cl 95%, 0.18 - 0.98; p = 0.04). Incidence of peritonitis was not significantly different between groups: with-mask group had 1.0 episode/year, and without-mask group had 0.94 episodes/year. Staphylococcus epidermidis was the most commonly identified agent. Staphylococcus aureus was found more frequently in the with-mask group (p = 0.003). Peritonitis due to Streptococcus viridans and Enterococci were detected only in the without-mask group. CONCLUSION: The current study suggests that routine use of face masks during CAPD bag exchanges may be unnecessary and could be discontinued.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.020 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".