Is Dialysis Always Justified? Ethics and Economics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Terminally ill patients requiring dialysis present complex ethical and medical dilemma to the nephrologists. With the rising health care costs and futility of care in such cases, the financial burden is a lingering concern. Methods: We describe a 77‐year‐old male with lymphoma and prostate cancer admitted for abdominal pain and weight loss. He was found to have metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma on laparotomy. His malignancy was deemed inoperable and was offered palliative care. Subsequent hospital course was complicated by sepsis with multiple organ failure resulting in acute renal failure requiring dialysis support. Being aware of his poor prognosis, patient initially declined interventions including dialysis. He was later convinced by his family and agreed to aggressive therapeutic intervention. Anticipating a complicated course, hemodialysis was initiated through cuffed tunneled catheter (CTC). Subsequently, he had multiple episodes of sepsis resulting in removal of CTC, necessitating insertion of 9 temporary dialysis catheters and 3 CTC over a 9‐month period; further complicated by thrombosis of both femoral veins. Eventually, patient's condition progressively deteriorated and dialysis was withdrawn with family's consent 9 months following surgery. Patient was put on comfort care and died 2 days later. He spent a total of 7½ months in ICU, 1 month in skilled care facility, and 2 weeks on regular hospital floor. Total VAMC expenditure was $373,964, which in a private setting would be approximately $1.0 million. Conclusion: This case highlights the futility of aggressive management of renal failure in terminally ill elderly patients. Besides its inability to improve quality of life, it adds as a financial burden to the society.
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 | 0.010 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".