MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088362587 · doi:10.1159/000183855

Cytotoxicity of Commercial Peritoneal Dialysis Solutions towards Peritoneal Cells of Chronically Uremic Mice

2008· article· en· W2088362587 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Gallimore, Raymonde F. Gagnon, Mary M. Stevenson

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journals · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeritoneal dialysisCytotoxicityMedicinePeritoneumOsmotic concentrationIncubationIn vitroPeritoneal cavityDialysisInternal medicineImmunologyAndrologyPathologySurgeryBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A gradual loss of cell viability was observed during in vitro incubation of peritoneal cells from chronically uremic mice in commercial peritoneal dialysis solutions. The magnitude of this cytotoxicity toward peritoneal cells harvested from uremic mice and controls was comparable. Resident peritoneal cells were always found to be more susceptible than thioglycolate-elicited peritoneal populations of either macrophages or polymorphonuclear cells. In order to elucidate the factors contributing to this phenomenon, resident peritoneal cells recovered from normal mice were incubated in vitro for 1 h in various solutions of known pH and osmolarity consisting of buffered and unbuffered commercial peritoneal dialysis solutions. The results clearly show that the major part of the cytotoxicity is attributable to the low pH of the solutions. Once pH was corrected, the hyperosmolarity of these solutions had no effect on cell viability; however, a small but significant cytotoxicity remained. Factors other than those addressed in this study probably account for the observed residual cytotoxicity.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations56
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journalsSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207