MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087746692 · doi:10.1159/000328017

Non-Dialysis Care: An Important Component of Care for Elderly Individuals with Advanced Stages of Chronic Kidney Disease

2011· review· en· W2087746692 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNephron Clinical Practice · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDialysisIntensive care medicinePeritoneal dialysisKidney diseaseDiseasePopulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-dialysis care (NDC) is the provision of all aspects of renal care except for the dialysis process. While the nomenclature may vary, with terms such as 'conservative care', 'maximal conservative management' or 'non-dialytic treatment' having been associated with NDC, the clinical principle is to provide comprehensive care to patients who opt to forgo dialysis despite increasing uraemic symptoms. NDC therapies focus on pain relief, the use of erythropoietin-stimulating agents, anti-pruritics and anti-nausea therapies, with lower emphasis on strategies used to modulate the rate of renal progression. Patient selection remains the most challenging aspect of developing an NDC program, with selection often being based on physician instinct, family principles and population-based prognostic risk measures. Outcomes are fair with a significant proportion of NDC patients experiencing lower hospitalization days and higher rates of death at home (or in a preferred environment) rather than in acute-care hospitals.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.365 · 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