MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138496270 · doi:10.1681/asn.v13suppl_1s48

Survival Comparison between Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis Based on Matched Doses of Delivered Therapy

2002· article· en· W2138496270 on OpenAlexaffabout
Prakash Keshaviah, Allan J. Collins, Z. Jennie, David Churchill, Kevin E. Thorpe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph's HospitalMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemodialysisPeritoneal dialysisDialysisProportional hazards modelContinuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysisUrologyBlood urea nitrogenKidney diseaseDialysis adequacyRenal replacement therapyInternal medicineNephrologyProspective cohort studyRenal functionSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have recently confirmed that hemodialysis (HD) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) survival is highly associated with delivered therapy Kt/V(urea). A direct comparison of equivalently dosed CAPD and HD has not previously been performed. A total of 968 incident HD patients at the Regional Kidney Disease Program from 1987 to June 1995 were studied, and these results were compared with those of the Canadian-United States prospective trial (CANUSA) consisting of 680 incident CAPD patients from September 1990 to December 31, 1992, with follow-up through December 31, 1993. All patients had quantitation of urea nitrogen for a total delivered dialysis session. On HD, in vivo, 2-pool, pre- and post-blood urea nitrogen kinetic modeling was performed with residual renal function determined every 6 mo. Patients were characterized by age, gender, race, renal diagnosis, and comorbid conditions. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the effect of the individual comorbid conditions and the effect of dialysis therapy in the time-dependent method. The mean total Kt/V, both residual renal function and dialytic therapy in the HD patients, was 1.59. The CANUSA-delivered weekly Kt/V was 2.38 at the beginning of the baseline period and 1.99 after 24 mo of follow-up. When the peak concentration hypothesis was used, a Kt/V of 1.59 on HD was equivalent to a weekly CAPD dose of 2.1 to 2.2. A 1-unit increase in Kt/V was associated with 7% lower risk of death on HD and with a similar 8% lower risk of death while on CAPD. Patients with diabetes aged 46 to 60 yr had virtually identical 2-yr survival estimates on HD (83 to 90%), compared with CAPD (83 to 89%), with Kt/V ranges from 0.84 to 1.70 in HD and from 1.6 to 2.2 weekly Kt/V on peritoneal dialysis. Comparisons between HD and CAPD in older patients with diabetes yielded comparable results. Patient survival is highly influenced by delivered dialysis in both HD and peritoneal dialysis. Carefully matching of the therapies with delivered Kt/V demonstrates little differences in the survival outcome of HD and peritoneal dialysis patients, in contrast to some previous reports.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations51
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207