Diabetes Mellitus and Younger Age Are Risk Factors for Hyperphosphatemia in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyperphosphatemia has been associated with adverse outcomes in patients with end stage kidney disease (ESKD). The purpose of this study was to determine risk factors for hyperphosphatemia in ESKD patients treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD). This information will be used to develop a patient specific phosphate binder application to facilitate patient self-management of serum phosphate. Adult PD patients documented their food, beverage, and phosphate binder intake for three days using a dietitian developed food journal. Phosphate content of meals was calculated using the ESHA Food Processor SQL Software (ESHA Research, Salem, UT, USA). Clinic biochemistry tests and an adequacy assessment (Baxter Adequest program) were done. Univariate logistic regression was used to determine predictors of serum phosphate >1.78 mmol/L. A multivariable logistic regression model was then fit including those variables that achieved a significance level of p < 0.20 in univariate analyses. Sixty patients (38 men, 22 women) completed the protocol; they were 60 ± 17 years old, 50% had a history of diabetes mellitus (DM) and 33% had hyperphosphatemia (PO4 > 1.78 mmol/L). In univariate analysis, the variables associated with an increased risk of hyperphosphatemia with a p-value < 0.2 were male gender (p = 0.13), younger age (0.07), presence of DM (0.005), higher dose of calcium carbonate (0.08), higher parathyroid serum concentration (0.08), lower phosphate intake (0.03), lower measured glomerular filtration rate (0.15), higher phosphate excretion (0.11), and a higher body mass index (0.15). After multivariable logistic regression analysis, younger age (odds ratio (OR) 0.023 per decade, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00065 to 0.455; p = 0.012), presence of diabetes (OR 11.40, 95 CI 2.82 to 61.55; p = 0.0003), and measured GFR (OR 0.052 per mL/min decrease; 95% CI 0.0025 to 0.66) were associated with hyperphosphatemia. Our results support that younger age and diabetes mellitus are significant risk factors for hyperphosphatemia. These findings warrant further investigation to determine the potential mechanisms that predispose younger patients and those with DM to hyperphosphatemia.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".