The Clinical Course of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Dialysis Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the clinical and echocardiographic outcome of left ventricular hypertrophy a prospective study was undertaken of 104 nondiabetic dialysis patients without dilated cardiomyopathy, who were followed for 3-5 years. 33% of patients had normal echocardiogram, 41% mild and 27% severe hypertrophy (left ventricular wall thickness greater than or equal to 1.4 cm in diastole). In the first 2 groups 16% progressed to severe hypertrophy, 23% were admitted with congestive heart failure after starting dialysis therapy, and 2-year cumulative survivals were 97 and 85%. In the group with severe hypertrophy 88% already had severe hypertrophy on starting dialysis therapy, it was persistent in 87%, 50% were admitted at least once with congestive heart failure, and the 2-year cumulative survival was 53%. 71% of those who died in the severe group died from cardiac or cerebrovascular causes compared to none of those with normal echocardiogram, which accounted for the significantly worse (p = 0.001) survival. We conclude that severe left ventricular hypertrophy occurs frequently in dialysis patients, is often present at the start of end-stage renal disease therapy, is persistent, may predispose to congestive heart failure, and is associated with a high mortality.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".