MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2417782397

Modalities and prescribing strategies in intensive home hemodialysis: a narrative review.

2015· article· en· W2417782397 on OpenAlexaff
Karlien François, Sassan Ghazan-Shahi, Christopher T. Chan

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemodialysisMedicineHome hemodialysisIntensive care medicineModalitiesMedical prescriptionDialysisNarrative reviewNursingInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decades, evidence on the benefits of intensive hemodialysis, more frequent and longer comparing to conventional hemodialysis, has emerged. The home environment is an ideal setting to perform intensive hemodialysis without the reliance on organizational and structural needs. The observed benefits of frequent hemodialysis have resulted in a rise in prevalent intensive home hemodialysis patients around the world. A successful home hemodialysis program requires a well-structured predialysis education program with focus on home dialysis and a dedicated multidisciplinary team with knowledge about the specifics of home hemodialysis and with a holistic approach to provide optimal care. In this narrative review, we describe different modalities of home hemodialysis and dialysis prescription specifics of intensive nocturnal hemodialysis, the modality with overall best outcomes.

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)0.004
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→