The Impact of Transfer from Hemodialysis on Peritoneal Dialysis Technique Survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients receive an initial period of hemodialysis (HD) before transitioning to PD ("PD-switch"). We sought to better understand the risks of PD technique failure (TF) and mortality for those patients compared with patients starting with PD as their first dialysis modality ("PD-first"). METHODS: Using Canadian Organ Replacement Register data, we compared the risk of PD TF between PD-first and PD-switch patients within the first year after HD initiation. In a secondary analysis, the PD-switch patients were stratified into three groups based on timing of the switch from initial HD to PD as follows: 0 - 90 days, 91 - 180 days, and 181 - 365 days. Each group was compared with PD-first patients for risk of PD TF and death. RESULTS: Between 2001 and 2010, 9404 patients initiated PD as their first renal replacement therapy, and 3757 switched from HD to PD. After multivariable adjustment, the risk of PD TF was higher among PD-switch patients than among PD-first patients [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR): 1.37; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.26 to 1.49], particularly within the first year after the switch from HD to PD (AHR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.36 to 1.68). There was no association between time on HD within the first year and subsequent risk of PD TF. For all the stratified PD-switch groups, death rates were higher than those for PD-first patients. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients who start renal replacement therapy with PD, those who transfer from HD to PD within the first year on dialysis experience higher rates of PD TF and death, with the highest risk being observed in the initial year after the switch to PD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".