Water‐Soluble Vitamins in People with Low Glomerular Filtration Rate or On Dialysis: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People with low glomerular filtration rate and people on dialysis are spontaneously at risk for vitamin deficiency because of the potential for problems with decreased appetite and decreased sense of smell and taste, leading to decreased intake, and because decreased energy or decreased cognitive ability results in difficulties in shopping and cooking. Imposed dietary restrictions because of their renal dysfunction and because of comorbidities such as hypertension and diabetes exacerbate this problem. Finally, particularly for water-soluble vitamins, loss may occur into the dialysate. We did not identify any randomized trials of administering daily doses close to the recommended daily allowances of these vitamins. In people who are eating at all, deficiencies of B5 and B7 seem unlikely. It is unclear whether supplements of B2 and B3 are necessary. Because of dialyzability and documented evidence of insufficiency in dialysis patients, B1 supplementation is likely to be helpful. B6, B9, and B12 are implicated in the hyperhomocysteinemia observed in patients on dialysis. These vitamins have been studied in combinations, in high doses, with the hope of reducing cardiovascular outcomes. No reductions in patient-important outcomes were seen in adequately powered randomized trials. Because of their involvement in the homocysteine pathway, however, supplementation with lower doses, close to the recommended daily allowances, may be helpful. Vitamin C deficiency is common in patients on dialysis who are not taking supplements: low-dose supplements are warranted. Vitamins for dialysis patients contain most or all of the B vitamins and low-dose vitamin C. We are not aware of any medical reasons to choose one over another.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".