MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143966830 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfq845

Effects of comorbid and demographic factors on dialysis modality choice and related patient survival in Europe

2011· article· en· W2143966830 on OpenAlexaff
Moniek W.M. van de Luijtgaarden, Marlies Noordzij, Vianda S Stel, Pietro Ravani, F. Jarraya, Frédéric Collart, Staffan Schön, T. Leivestad, H Puttinger, Christoph Wanner, Kitty J. Jager

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersEuropean Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association
KeywordsMedicineComorbidityMalignancyProportional hazards modelInternal medicineDialysisDiabetes mellitusHazard ratioLogistic regressionPeritoneal dialysisHemodialysisConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The mean age of patients starting dialysis increased over the years, as has the proportion of patients with diabetes mellitus, ischaemic heart disease, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), cerebrovascular disease (CD) and malignancy. We assessed dialysis modality choice within subgroups of patients with these comorbidities and in different age categories and subsequently evaluated the association between modality choice and patient survival in these subgroups. METHODS: Seven European renal registries participating in the ERA-EDTA Registry provided data from 15,828 incident peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis (HD) patients (1998-2006) with available comorbidity data. The likelihood to receive PD rather than HD was assessed with logistic regression and 3-year survival on PD versus HD was evaluated using Cox regression. RESULTS: Besides large international variations in the likelihood to receive PD, we found that elderly patients and patients with PVD, CD, malignancy and multiple comorbidities were significantly less likely to receive PD than HD. Overall patients starting on PD had survival benefits [adjusted hazard ratio (HR(adj)) 0.82 (0.75-0.90)], especially patients without comorbidity [HR(adj) 0.65 (0.53-0.80)] or those with malignancy [HR(adj) 0.73 (0.56-0.94)]. In males, survival benefits of PD were independent of diabetic status. Conversely, diabetic females tended to have increased mortality risk on PD [HR(adj) 1.16 (0.93-1.44)], especially if they were >70 years [HR(adj) 1.55 (1.15-2.08)]. CONCLUSIONS: In general, modality choice was consistent with expected survival. However, elderly patients, non-diabetic patients and those with malignancy were less likely to receive PD, even though they had decreased mortality risk on PD. Also, although a survival benefit of PD was found for male patients without comorbidity, HD was just as likely to be the chosen dialysis modality as was PD for these patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations116
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207