MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134422414 · doi:10.1681/asn.2010121219

Medicare Reimbursement Policies and Hemodialysis Vascular Access Outcomes

2011· article· en· W2134422414 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Allon, Lesley C. Dinwiddie, Eduardo Lacson, Derrick L. Latos, Charmaine E. Lok, Theodore I. Steinman, Daniel E. Weiner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsMedicaidReimbursementVascular accessHemodialysisMedicineBusinessFinanceOperations managementSurgeryEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In March 2010, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) convened several clinical technical expert panels (C-TEP) to provide recommendations for improving various aspects of hemodialysis management. One of the C-TEPs was tasked with recommending measures to decrease vascular access-related infections. The members of this C-TEP, who are the authors of this manuscript, concluded unanimously that the single most important measure would be to remove financial and regulatory barriers to timely placement and revision of hemodialysis fistulas and the concurrent avoidance of catheter use. The following position paper outlines the financial barriers to improved vascular access outcomes and our proposals for a future CMS demonstration project.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations32
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207