MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Whatʼs new in peritoneal dialysis: biocompatibility and continuous flow peritoneal dialysis

2002· review· en· W2014233663 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Stigant, Joanne M. Bargman

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Nephrology & Hypertension · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeritoneal dialysisMedicineDialysisUltrafiltration (renal)UrologyIntensive care medicineSurgeryChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review examines recent developments in the understanding of the effect of conventional, bioincompatible peritoneal dialysis fluids on structural and functional changes in the peritoneal membrane. Emphasis is placed on the clinically relevant outcome of failure of long-term peritoneal dialysis. Therapeutic strategies to prevent technique failure, including the use of new peritoneal dialysis fluids and continuous flow peritoneal dialysis, are explored. RECENT FINDINGS: Long-term (greater than 6 months) exposure to new peritoneal dialysis fluids with physiologic pH, lower lactate concentrations, or lower concentrations of glucose degradation products results in improved leukocyte cytokine release, ultrafiltration, and mesothelial cell mass, respectively. Continuous flow peritoneal dialysis allows efficient small molecule removal using dialysate with lower glucose concentration and possibly less glucose degradation products. Recent technical advances include creation of a double-lumen peritoneal dialysis catheter, and methods of monitoring intra-abdominal pressure and ultrafiltration. SUMMARY: Though initial reports with biocompatible peritoneal dialysis fluids are promising, the efficacy of these new solutions in preventing long-term peritoneal dialysis failure is unproven. Conditions in which new peritoneal dialysis fluids may be beneficial are suggested. Continuous flow peritoneal dialysis requires substantial technical improvements before this technique can be widely accepted.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations9
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Nephrology & HypertensionSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207