MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W27093714

Sodium thiosulfate-based treatment in calcific uremic arteriolopathy: a consecutive case series.

2011· article· en· W27093714 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aditya Sood, Lori D Wazny, Colette B. Raymond, Kelvin Leung, Paul Komenda, Martina Reslerova, Mauro Verrelli, Claudio Rigatto, Manish M. Sood

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParathyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCalciphylaxisSodium thiosulfateKidney diseaseSurgeryAdverse effectComplicationProspective cohort studyInternal medicineDisease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Calcific uremic arteriolopathy (CUA) is a rare complication in end stage renal disease with high mortality. Numerous case reports and one case series of 3 patients report the benefit of sodium thiosulfate (STS) for treatment of CUA. The purpose of this evaluation was to examine the response to a STS-based treatment approach in patients with CUA with 1 year follow up. METHODS: A retrospective case series of 6 consecutive patients from Manitoba, Canada who met predefined diagnostic criteria for CUA and received STS between 2006 and 2008 were included. STS responders were defined as improvement in at least one of the following three parameters: pain severity, wound size and diagnostic imaging/radiography. Mortality, STS dose, duration, adverse events and cost were also collected. RESULTS: Four patients were classified as responders. The 2 responders who survived at 1 year of follow-up demonstrated an improvement in all 3 parameters examined including an improvement in their follow-up diagnostic imaging results within the first 4 - 6 weeks of STS treatment. At 1 year of follow-up, 3 patients died. CONCLUSION: Using an STS-based multifaceted treatment approach for CUA, 4 patients responded but 3 of 6 patients died within 1 year. Further larger prospective studies are needed to delineate STS responders from non-responders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicParathyroid Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207