MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Aluminio en pacientes con terapia de reemplazo renal crónico con hemodiálisis en dos unidades renales en Bogotá

2010· article· es· W2151197204 on OpenAlexaff
Omayda Cárdenas, Omar Segura, William Puentes, Mauricio Sanabria, Rubén Torrenegra

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Salud Pública · 2010
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAluminum toxicity and tolerance in plants and animals
Canadian institutionsInstitute of AgingCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAluminiumDialysisMedicineAluminium hydroxideChemistryUrologyInternal medicineMetallurgyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Determining aluminium concentrations in the serum of patients undergoing chronic renal replacement therapy with haemodialysis and concentration in distribution network water and dialysis in two renal units in Bogotá. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a descriptive study of 63 haemodialysed patients and 20 healthy subjects. Aluminium concentration was determined in water and serum using graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry with deuterium lamp background corrector. RESULTS: Average aluminium concentration was 26.5 µg/L in patients (ranging from 11.2 to 49.2 µg/L; 8.03 standard deviation) and 8.05 µg/L in healthy individuals (ranging from undetectable to 17.2 µg/L; 4.31 standard deviation). Aluminium concentration in dialysis water and distribution network water was below 2 µg/L and 200 µg/L, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Aluminium concentration in water and serum in this study was below international standard values, thereby indicating appropriate treatment. Additionally, aluminium concentration in pre-HD and post-HD sera was below that reported previously. Aluminium hydroxide uptake increases aluminium concentration in serum. Personal situation regarding age, gender, civil and work status were not risk factors determining aluminium concentrations in serum.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.253
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de Salud PúblicaSame topicAluminum toxicity and tolerance in plants and animalsFrench-language works237,207