Efficacy of beta‐hydroxy‐beta‐methylbutyrate supplementation in maintenance hemodialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients suffer from a number of co-morbidities including declines in muscle mass and physical function. Beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate (HMB) is a metabolite of the amino acid leucine that has been shown to improve lean mass and physical function in elderly and clinical populations, but had not been studied in MHD patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of HMB in this population. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial to assess the effects of daily HMB supplementation on co-morbidities in MHD patients. MHD patients were recruited and assigned to either daily supplementation with HMB (n = 16) or placebo (n = 17) for 6 months. Measurements of body composition, bone density, strength, physical function, fall risk, quality of life, and blood parameters were measured at baseline and 6 months. Blood was drawn at baseline, 3, and 6 months to measure compliance. FINDINGS: No significant effects of HMB on body composition, bone density, strength, physical function, fall risk, quality of life, or blood parameters were observed. On analysis of plasma HMB concentrations, 5 of 16 patients (31%) in the HMB group were found to be noncompliant at 3 or 6 months. Therefore, we performed a per-protocol analysis with compliant participants only and observed no significant differences in our outcomes of interest. DISCUSSION: These results do not support the efficacy of HMB to attenuate co-morbid conditions in MHD patients. Moreover, this highlights the need for future interventions targeted at reducing pill burden and improving pill compliance in this population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".