Extracellular fluid management and hypertension in urban dwelling versus rural dwelling hemodialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rural-dwelling hemodialysis patients have less frequent contact with nephrologists than urban-dwelling patients, and are known to have higher mortality. We hypothesized that rural-dwelling hemodialysis patients would have more evidence of poorly controlled extracellular fluid volume (ECVF) than otherwise similar urban-dwellers. METHODS: We studied prevalent hemodialysis patients within a single renal program in Alberta, Canada and assessed ECFV using bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS). Our primary outcome was impedance vector length (ohm/m) as assessed by BIS using the Xitron Hydra 4200 device, where shorter vector length indicated poorer ECFV control. Because poor ECFV control can lead to hypertension, we also assessed pre- and post-dialysis blood pressure. We measured outcomes at baseline. RESULTS: We studied 228 hemodialysis patients, of whom 115 (50.4 %) and 113 (49.6 %) were urban- and rural-dwelling, respectively. There were no differences in volume control in urban versus rural participants; odds ratio (OR) for vector length in the lowest sex-specific quartile of vector length was 0.93 (95 % CI 0.54, 1.59) after adjusting for age, sex, diabetic status, years since dialysis initiation and phase angle. The odds of very poor blood pressure control (pre-dialysis blood pressure ≥180/100) did not differ between urban and rural participants [fully adjusted OR 0.96 (0.36, 2.60)]. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in ECFV control do not appear to explain higher mortality among remote- and rural- dwelling hemodialysis patients, compared to urban-dwellers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".