MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972536165 · doi:10.1111/sdi.12317

Euvolemia in Hemodialysis Patients: A Potentially Dangerous Goal?

2014· review· en· W1972536165 on OpenAlexafffund
Shih‐Han S. Huang, Guido Filler, Robert M. Lindsay, Chris McIntyre

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Dialysis · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineDialysisHemodialysisIntravascular volume statusVolume overloadDiseaseRenal replacement therapyCardiologyInternal medicineHeart failureHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dialysis patients have high mortality rate and the leading cause of death is cardiovascular disease. Uremic cardiomyopathy differs from that due to conventional atherosclerosis, where cardiovascular changes result in ineffective circulation and lead to tissue ischemia. Modern dialysis has significant limitations with fluid management probably the most challenging. Current evidence suggests that both volume overload and aggressive fluid removal can induce circulatory stress and multi-organ injury. Furthermore, we do not have accurate volume assessment tools. As a result, targeting euvolemia might result in more harm than benefit with conventional hemodialysis therapy. Therefore, it might be time to consider a degree of permissive over-hydration until we have better tools to both determine ideal weight and improve current renal replacement therapy so that the process of achieving it is not so fraught with the current dangers.

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)0.001
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations33
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in DialysisSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207