FP762THE ROLE OF SOCIAL SUPPORT IN HEMODIALYSIS PATIENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and Aims: A number of patients with End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) have significant impairment in social support. Especially, the limited function of patients with hemodialysis (HD) prevents them from social activities and even makes them social withdrawal. Clinical problems such as nutritional status and HD adequacy, and psychosocial problems such as quality of life, anxiety and depression are associated with increased morbidity and mortality in HD patients. However, there are few studies of the factors affecting the social support in HD patients. The aim of the current study was to identify the clinical and psychosocial factors including quality of life related to impaired social support in HD patients. Methods: The 101 participants (55 males with mean age 57.1±12.1 years) on HD from the Daegu Catholic University Medical Center were assessed from September in 2013 to September in 2014. Patients on HD for acute kidney injury were excluded from this study. Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social support(MSPSS) was used for evaluating patients' social support. Psychosocial factors were evaluated using Euro Quality of Life Questionnaire 5-Dimensional Classification (EQ-5D), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Laboratory and clinical information including hemoglobin, vitamin D (25(OH)D, 1,25(OH)2D3), albumin, Kt/V (a marker of dialysis adequacy), normalized protein catabolic rate (nPCR), ferritin, bone mass index (BMI), duration of HD were assessed. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression with backward selection was performed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".