Intensive Hemodialysis Associates with Improved Pregnancy Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pregnancy is rare in women with ESRD and when it occurs, it is often accompanied by significant maternal and fetal morbidity and even mortality. Preliminary data from the Toronto Nocturnal Hemodialysis Program suggested that increased clearance of uremic toxins by intensified hemodialysis improves pregnancy outcomes, but small numbers and the absence of a comparator group limited widespread applicability of these findings. We compared pregnancy outcomes from 22 pregnancies in the Toronto Pregnancy and Kidney Disease Clinic and Registry (2000-2013) with outcomes from 70 pregnancies in the American Registry for Pregnancy in Dialysis Patients (1990-2011). The primary outcome was the live birth rate and secondary outcomes included gestational age and birth weight. The live birth rate in the Canadian cohort (86.4%) was significantly higher than the rate in the American cohort (61.4%; P=0.03). Among patients with established ESRD, the median duration of pregnancy in the more intensively dialyzed Toronto cohort was 36 weeks (interquartile range, 32-37) compared with 27 weeks (interquartile range, 21-35) in the American cohort (P=0.002). Furthermore, a dose response between dialysis intensity and pregnancy outcomes emerged, with live birth rates of 48% in women dialyzed ≤20 hours per week and 85% in women dialyzed >36 hours per week (P=0.02), with a longer gestational age and greater infant birth weight for women dialyzed more intensively. Pregnancy complications were few and manageable. We conclude that pregnancy may be safe and feasible in women with ESRD receiving intensive hemodialysis.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".