MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

An Incenter Nocturnal Hemodialysis Program-Three Years Experience

2003· article· en· W2089834385 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. Gene Radford, Debra S. Shultman, Anna G. Pasour, Anne M. Cobb, Joseph T. Chandler

Bibliographic record

VenueHemodialysis International · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemodialysisDialysisNocturnalStaffingDialysis adequacyEmergency medicineSurgeryInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report our experience with a program of long, slow, overnight hemodialysis (HD) performed 3 times a week in an existing dialysis facility. Beginning in April 1999, 14 chairs in one bay of our facility were replaced with beds, subdued lighting was installed, and machine alarms were decreased to minimum volume. Fresenius F60 dialyzers were selected with a QB of 220–300 ml/min and a QD of 400–500 ml/min. Patients dialyze for 7–8 hrs overnight. Staffing is with 1 nurse and 1 PCT for 10 patients. Standard dialysate is used, and heparin is dosed 100 U/kg at treatment initiation and again at mid-treatment. All access types are utilized. The program is open to all patients in our area. A total of 65 patients have participated, with a current census of 20 patients. Participants have tried nocturnal dialysis for a variety of reasons including work/school schedules, excessive interdialytic weight gains, inadequate dialysis (due to poor access function or large body mass), and hemodynamic instability with standard daytime HD. Blood pressure control has improved among the participants in the program, perhaps due to more gentle ultrafiltration and improvement in maintenance of dry weight. Among 31 patients who remained on nocturnal dialysis for over 6 months, 21 started the program on an average of 2.5 antihypertensive agents (AHA). After 6 months, 9 patients no longer needed AHA while 12 patients remain on an average of 1.3 AHA. URR also improved by an average of 4.35 among 13 patients who transferred from standard incenter HD to the nocturnal program. In all, 45 patients have left the program, for reasons which include insomnia/social (15), death (9), transfer to home HD (8), renal transplantation (6), noncompliance (3), moved away (2), and other (2). In conclusion, long overnight HD can be performed in an existing dialysis facility, providing patients with another HD option. Patients who may benefit from this modality include those with daytime jobs, patients with inadequate clearance on standard HD, patients with excessive interdialytic weight gains, and those who poorly tolerate standard HD.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemodialysis International→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→