Treatment Policy rather than Patient Characteristics Determines Convection Volume in Online Post-Dilution Hemodiafiltration
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Sub-analyses of three large trials showed that hemodiafiltration (HDF) patients who achieved the highest convection volumes had the lowest mortality risk. The aims of this study were (1) to identify determinants of convection volume and (2) to assess whether differences exist between patients achieving high and low volumes. METHODS: HDF patients from the CONvective TRAnsport STudy (CONTRAST) with a complete dataset at 6 months (314 out of a total of 358) were included in this post hoc analysis. Determinants of convection volume were identified by regression analysis. RESULTS: Treatment time, blood flow rate, dialysis vintage, serum albumin and hematocrit were independently related. Neither vascular access nor dialyzer characteristics showed any relation with convection volume. Except for some variation in body size, patient characteristics did not differ across tertiles of convection volume. CONCLUSION: Treatment time and blood flow rate are major determinants of convection volume. Hence, its magnitude depends on center policy rather than individualized patient prescription.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it