MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096308053 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfi281

Haemodialysis vascular access problems in Canada: results from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS II)

2005· article· en· W2096308053 on OpenAlexaffabout
David C. Mendelssohn, Jean Éthier, S. J. Elder, Rajiv Saran, Friedrich K. Port, Ronald L. Pisoni

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsHumber River Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDialysisReferralVascular accessNephrologyProspective cohort studyInternal medicineObservational studyArteriovenous fistulaHemodialysisEmergency medicineSurgeryFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The optimal vascular access for chronic maintenance haemodialysis (HD) is the native arteriovenous fistula (AVF). Vascular access practice patterns are reported for a Canadian cohort of patients from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS II). METHODS: DOPPS II is a prospective, observational study in 12 countries, including Canada. A representative random sample of 20 Canadian HD facilities and patients within those units were studied during 2002-2004. Canadian results were compared with those found in Europe and the USA. RESULTS: AVF use in Canadian prevalent (53%) and incident (26%) patients was lower than Canadian guidelines recommend (60%), and lower than in Europe [prevalent (74%), incident (50%)]. Despite 85% of Canadian HD patients having seen a nephrologist for > 1 month prior to starting dialysis, central venous catheter use in Canada (33% in prevalent patients, 70% in incident patients) was much higher than in Europe (prevalent 18%, incident 46%) and slightly higher than in the USA (prevalent 25%, incident 66%). This pattern is contrary to the preferences of Canadian medical directors and vascular access surgeons. The typical time from referral until permanent vascular access creation is substantially longer in Canada (61.7 days) than in Europe (29.4 days) or the USA (16 days). This longer delay time and higher catheter use in Canada may be a consequence of the significantly lower number of access surgeons per 100 HD patients in Canada (2.9) compared with the USA (8.1) and Europe (4.6). Furthermore, the median hours per week devoted to vascular access-related surgery per 100 patients is substantially lower in Canada (0.027 h) compared with the USA (0.082 h) and Europe (0.059 h). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that Canadian chronic HD patients often rely on central venous catheters for vascular access, despite their known association with numerous detrimental outcomes in HD. Nephrologists, vascular access surgeons, interventional radiologists, other physicians and health care funding bodies must be more broadly educated about the priority of AVF creation as the preferred vascular access for chronic HD patients. They must work together to secure both the human and financial resources and other health care system enhancements to increase AVF creation rates in a timely manner.

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)0.003
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations181
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207