MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1876913881 · doi:10.1111/hdi.12343

Calculation of the clearance requirements for the development of a hemodialysis‐based wearable artificial kidney

2015· article· en· W1876913881 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dong Ki Kim, Jung Chan Lee, Hajeong Lee, Kwon Wook Joo, Kook‐Hwan Oh, Yon Su Kim, Hyung‐Jin Yoon, Hee Chan Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueHemodialysis International · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialysisArtificial kidneyMedicineHemodialysisCreatinineUrologyIntensive care medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wearable artificial kidney (WAK) has been considered an alternative to standard hemodialysis (HD) for many years. Although various novel WAK systems have been recently developed for use in clinical applications, the target performance or standard dose of dialysis has not yet been determined. To calculate the appropriate clearance for a HD-based WAK system for the treatment of patients with end-stage renal disease with various dialysis conditions, a classic variable-volume two-compartment kinetic model was used to simulate an anuric patient with variable target time-averaged creatinine concentration (TAC), daily water intake volume, daily dialysis pause time, and patient body weight. A 70-kg anuric patient with a HD-based WAK system operating for 24 h required dialysis clearances of creatinine of at least 100, 50, and 25 mL/min to achieve TACs of 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 mg/dL, respectively. The daily water intake volume did not affect the clearance required for dialysis under various conditions. As the pause time per day for the dialysis increased, higher dialysis clearances were required to maintain the target TAC. The present study provided theoretical dialysis doses for an HD-based WAK system to achieve various target TACs through relevant mathematical kinetic modeling. The theoretical results may contribute to the determination of the technical specifications required for the development of a WAK system.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemodialysis International→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→