Intradialytic hypotension: Frequency, sources of variation and correlation with clinical outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intradialytic hypotension (IH) is a frequent complication of hemodialysis (HD) and is associated with increased patient mortality and cardiovascular events. We studied IH to determine its variability, correlates, and clinical impact in 13 outpatient HD facilities. Blood pressure was captured by machine download. IH was defined as >30 mmHg decrease in systolic blood pressure to <90 mmHg. Risk factors were assessed by logistic regression and hospitalization by Poisson regression. Time to death and first hospitalization were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis in patients completing >20 HD treatments. We studied IH in 44,801 treatments (Tx) in 1137 patients. IH was frequent (17.2% of treatments) and highly variable by patient (0-100% Tx) and dialysis facility (11.1-25.8% Tx). 25.1% of patients had no IH (0% Tx) and 16.2% had IH on >35% Tx. Increased IH frequency was associated with age, female gender, diabetes, Hispanic origin, longer end stage renal disease vintage, higher body mass index, higher ultrafiltration volume, the second and third weekly Tx, lower pre-HD systolic blood pressure, higher difference between prescribed and achieved post-HD weight, and higher dialysate temperature. Dialysis facility was an independent predictor of IH frequency. Patients with >35% IH treatments had poorer survival (P = 0.036), and more frequent and longer hospitalization (P = 0.04, P = 0.002, respectively) than patients without IH. In conclusion, IH frequency was highly variable, associated with individual facilities, patient and treatment characteristics, and correlated with mortality and hospitalization. Identifying practice patterns associated with IH coupled with routine reporting of IH will facilitate medical management and may result in the prevention of IH, decreased mortality, and decreased hospitalization.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".