Calcium carbonate, but not sevelamer, is associated with better outcomes in hemodialysis patients: Results from the <scp>F</scp>rench <scp>ARNOS</scp> study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A favorable survival effect of phosphate binders (PBs) on incident hemodialysis (HD) patients was recently reported, but no definitive advantages of calcium-based or noncalcium-based PBs have been demonstrated. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the prescription of PBs using calcium carbonate (CaCO(3) ) or sevelamer HCl (SV) on survival. Baseline PB prescription was recorded using a cross-sectional analysis of prevalent HD patients from the regional Association Régionale des Néphrologues OStéodystrophie French cohort. A prospective 42-month survival analysis study was performed. In July 2005, 1347 HD patients were included. CaCO(3) , SV, and mixed PBs were prescribed in 55%, 42%, and 24% of cases, respectively, and 26% were not prescribed PBs. Using a Cox proportional model adjusted for several parameters, CaCO(3) use was found to be associated with less mortality (HR, 0.64 [0.4-0.78]), but not in the case of SV use (HR, 1.13 [0.92-1.3]). SV prescription was associated with higher mortality than CaCO(3) (HR, 1.46 [1.1-1.9]). CaCO3, but not sevelamer prescription, is associated with a favorable effect on survival in a French HD population. This novel result can be partly accounted for by the differences in mineral metabolism disorder management that exist between randomized controlled trials and "real life" conditions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".