Predicting episodes of hypotension by continuous blood volume monitoring among critically ill patients in acute renal failure on intermittent hemodialysis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute renal failure (ARF) develops in 23% of all critically ill patients. Hypotension occurs in 25% to 50% of patients during intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) for ARF. Blood volume (BV) monitoring has been used in chronic renal failure, with limited use in ARF during IHD. Continuous BV monitoring in the stable critically ill patient with ARF could predict, and possibly prevent, development of hypotensive episodes. METHODS: This prospective observational study examined the relationship of BV and BV slopes to hypotension in 11 critically ill adults with ARF over three consecutive IHD Runs. The hypothesis was that there is a patient-specific critical BV and/or a specific BV slope that indicates forthcoming hypotension. RESULTS: The incidence of hypotension, according to mean arterial pressure < 70 mmHg, was 70%. No relationship was found between BV and blood pressure, and occurrence of hypotension in critically ill patients with ARF on IHD. CONCLUSION: Monitoring BV was not shown to predict hypotension in this cohort dialyzed via central venous catheters.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".