MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095906312 · doi:10.1093/ckj/sfv003

Optimization of the convection volume in online post-dilution haemodiafiltration: practical and technical issues

2015· article· en· W2095906312 on OpenAlex
Isabelle Chapdelaine, Camiel L.M. de Roij van Zuijdewijn, Ira M. Mostovaya, Renée Lévesque, Andrew Davenport, Peter J. Blankestijn, Christoph Wanner, Menso J. Nubé, Muriël P.C. Grooteman, on behalf of the EUDIAL Group, Carlo Basile, Francesco Locatelli, Francisco Maduell, Sandip Mitra, Claudio Ronco, Rukshana Shroff, James Tattersall

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

VenueClinical Kidney Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsHôpital Saint-LucCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersKidney Research UK
KeywordsVolume (thermodynamics)DilutionConvectionFiltration (mathematics)Volume fractionMechanicsMedicineComputer scienceThermodynamicsMathematicsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In post-dilution online haemodiafiltration (ol-HDF), a relationship has been demonstrated between the magnitude of the convection volume and survival. However, to achieve high convection volumes (>22 L per session) detailed notion of its determining factors is highly desirable. This manuscript summarizes practical problems and pitfalls that were encountered during the quest for high convection volumes. Specifically, it addresses issues such as type of vascular access, needles, blood flow rate, recirculation, filtration fraction, anticoagulation and dialysers. Finally, five of the main HDF systems in Europe are briefly described as far as HDF prescription and optimization of the convection volume is concerned.

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)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.330 · 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