MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979164495 · doi:10.1159/000193052

Ventilatory Responses and Acute Acid-Base Changes in Response to Inhaled Carbon Dioxide in Patients with Chronic Renal Failure on Long-Term Haemodialysis

2009· article· en· W1979164495 on OpenAlexaff
Gretchen Gibson, Jonathan A. Streeton

Bibliographic record

VenueRespiration · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal function and acid-base balance
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinepCO2Carbon dioxideRespiratory acidosisAcid–base imbalanceAcidosisChronic renal failureRespiratory systemHemodialysisMetabolic acidosisKidney diseaseBicarbonateAnesthesiaInternal medicineArterial bloodRespiratory failureCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Six patients with chronic renal failure on long-term haemodialysis were studied. Measurements of acid-base status, ventilatory responses to inhaled carbon dioxide, and the ability to buffer an acute respiratory acidosis were made before and after haemodialysis The resting arterial pCO2 values were all in the low normal range (mean 36.7, SD 1.7 mm Hg), with a mean pH of 7.37, SD 0.03. After haemodialysis, the arterial pCO9 values were not significantly different, despite a mean increase in pH of 0.09 units. There was no evidence of an increased sensitivity to carbon dioxide. There were no significant changes in the slopes or the intercepts of the carbon dioxide response lines following haemodialysis. After haemodialysis, the slopes of the [H+]/pCO2 buffer lines were not significantly different to those obtained before haemodialysis. It would appear that the blood of these patients probably has a reduced ability to buffer an acute respiratory acidosis

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRespirationSame topicRenal function and acid-base balanceFrench-language works237,207