MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170719852 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfq173

A simple approach for assessing equilibrated Kt/V 2-M on a routine basis

2010· article· en· W2170719852 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Gaetano Casino, Luciano A. Pedrini, Antonio Santoro, S. Mandolfo, Sascha David, V. De Cristofaro, Ugo Teatini, Carlo Lomonte, Teresa Molina-López

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Children's HospitalChild and Family Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKt/VHemodialysisVolume (thermodynamics)Nuclear medicineUrologyInternal medicineThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Large observational studies have shown a reduction in morbidity and mortality in patients on high-flux haemodialysis (HD) or convective techniques, compared with low-flux HD. An index to evaluate treatment efficiency in middle molecule (MM) removal would be recommended. Since beta-2-microglobulin (beta2-M) is a recognized MM marker, we evaluated an easy approach for Kt/V(beta2-M) assessment on a routine basis, avoiding other complex methods. METHODS: An equation that estimates single-pool (sp) Kt/V(beta2-M) was derived from Leypoldt's formula, which calculates beta2-M dialyser clearance (K(beta2-M)) from the post/pre-dialysis beta2-M concentration (C(t)/C(0)) ratio and the weight loss/end-dialysis weight (Delta W/W) ratio. Our equation, spKt/V(beta2-M) = 6.12 Delta W/W [1 - ln(C(t)/C(0))/ln(1 + 6.12 Delta W/W)], was derived by assuming urea distribution volume (V(u)) as 49% of W and beta2-M volume (V(beta2-M)) as V(u)/3, in agreement with the average patient values in the HEMO Study. The spKt/V(beta2-M) values calculated with our equation (F) in 129 patients on 407 sessions of different high-flux treatments were compared with those calculated with the method applied in the HEMO Study (HM). Equilibrated beta2-M concentration (C(eq)) of the same sessions was also estimated with the equation for C(eq) by Tattersall, and equilibrated Kt/V (eKt/V(beta2-M)) was calculated by introducing Tattersall's equation into our simplified spKt/V(beta2-M) formula. RESULTS: Mean results of our spKt/V(beta2-M) equation (F) were very close to those of the HM method (1.48 +/- 0.38 vs 1.47 +/- 0.37). The difference was less than +/-0.1 in 95% of cases. A mean end-session beta2-M rebound of 44 +/- 14% was predicted, which caused a mean reduction in actual Kt/V(beta2-M) of ~27% (eKt/V(beta2-M) = 1.08 +/- 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: The method proposed to estimate spKt/V(beta2-M) and eKt/V(beta2-M) could become a simple tool to monitor the efficiency of high-flux HD and convective techniques and to evaluate the adequacy of treatments in terms of MM removal. Moreover, it might help to better understand the effects of different dialysis schedules. Validation on a larger dialysis population is required.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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