SP465INTRADIALYTIC CARDIAC MRI TO ASSESS CARDIOVASCULAR RESPONSES IN ARANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF HAEMODIAFILTRATION VS. HEMODIALYSIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and Aims: Studies utilizing echocardiography and positron emission tomography (PET) have identified that haemodynamic stress during haemodialysis (HD) results in recurrent segmental ischaemic injury (myocardial stunning) driving cumulative cardiac injury. Here, we perform the first study of intradialytic cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to assess the cardiovascular effects of dialysis, and to compare standard haemodialysis with haemodiafiltration. Methods: 12 established HD patients (32-72 years) were randomly allocated to either HD or HDF. Patients were stabilized on either modality for two weeks before undergoing serial cardiac MR assessment during dialysis (Phillips 3T Achieva). Patients then crossed-over to the other modality, and were rescanned after a further two weeks. Measurements included hemodynamic response (cardiac index (CI), stroke volume index (SVI)), global contractile function (ejection fraction, cardiac strain), segmental function (acute cardiac injury), blood pool return (IVC blood flow), myocardial fibrosis (T1 mapping), and myocardial hemodynamics (coronary artery flow and myocardial perfusion using arterial spin labeling).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".