The Fluid Study Protocol: A Randomized Controlled Study on the Effects of Bioimpedance Analysis and Vitamin D on Left Ventricular Mass in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We will evaluate the effects of bioimpedance analysis-guided fluid management to reduce volume expansion, of vitamin D(3) supplementation, and of the combination of those techniques on decrease of left ventricular mass in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. DESIGN: This multicenter randomized controlled trial, with a 2 × 2 factorial design, will be conducted at PD clinics affiliated with 3 Canadian teaching hospitals. Consenting PD patients 18 years of age or older will be included. Patients will be excluded if they have contraindications to bioimpedance or magnetic resonance imaging, life or technique expectancy of less than 1 year, peritonitis within the preceding 3 months, or serum calcium above 2.55 mmol/L. INTERVENTION: The study will randomize 70 patients to bio-impedance-guided volume management or to usual care and to vitamin D(3) 50,000 U weekly for 8 doses, and then 10,000 U weekly or to matching placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome will be change in left ventricular mass at 1 year as determined by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. The secondary outcome will be a composite endpoint of death, nonfatal cardiovascular event, and transfer to hemodialysis for dialysis inadequacy or ultrafiltration failure. Other outcome measures will include blood pressure, quality of life, 6-minute walk test, inflammatory and fibrotic markers and their association with peritoneal membrane transport properties, and residual renal function. Patients will be followed for clinical outcomes for up to 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: This study will assess whether bioimpedance-directed volume management and vitamin D(3) supplementation can improve left ventricular mass in PD 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".