Barriers to access before initiation of hemodialysis: A single‐center review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guidelines recommend that > or =50% of patients starting dialysis have a fistula. We reviewed our experience in consecutive incident patients over a 1-year period. Only 30 of the 93 patients starting hemodialysis had a fistula that was accessed. Late referral (nephrology contact <90 days) was a significant issue in 48% (30/63) of the patients without a fistula. Most (n=21) of the late referrals were acute disease; only 9 were late referrals of chronic disease. Nephrology follow-up exceeded 200 days in the remaining (33/63) without this access. In the cohort with sufficient nephrology referral, we explored variables associated with a fistula (n=30) compared with those without one (n=33). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, peripheral vascular disease (odds ratio [OR] 0.026, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.002-0.286) and rapid loss of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (OR 0.745 per mL/min/1.73 m(2)/year, 95% CI 0.625-0.888) in the year preceding dialysis were significant negative predictors for a fistula. Patients without access experienced faster declines in GFR in the year preceding dialysis (12.1+/-9.9 vs. 4.7+/-3.5 mL/min 1.73 m(2) with access, p<0.001). Glomerular filtration rate loss in the 2 years before starting dialysis was the same between the 2 groups (-0.54+/-10.4 vs. 1.42+/-3.9 mL/min 1.73 m(2)). Age, sex, diabetes, other comorbidity, length of nephrology follow-up, eGFR at dialysis start, hemoglobin, and albumin were not significant. At our center, rapid loss of renal function in otherwise stable chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients is more important than late referral of CKD for the lack of access. Improvements in rapid referral for access creation could help reduce this barrier.
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 | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".