The Impact of Hemodialysis Frequency and Duration on Blood Pressure Management and Quality of Life in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiovascular complications are the most prominent causes of morbidity and mortality among chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergoing standard hemodialysis (HD) therapy. Cardiovascular disease risk is increased significantly through persistent hypertension and blood pressure (BP) fluctuation, which are the most common complications of CKD. It was hypothesized that an extended approach with lengthier and more frequent dialysis sessions, referred to in this paper as "extended hemodialysis" (EHD), can potentially lower and stabilize blood pressure, and consequently reduce the rate of morbidity and mortality. A greater reduction of volume (salt and water) with higher frequency can improve patient quality of life (QOL). Eleven papers, including clinical trials and systematic reviews were chosen and analyzed. The extracted data was used to evaluate the change in blood pressure levels between standard HD and EHD. Overall, the studies showed that EHD resulted in improved blood pressure management; therefore, we concluded that there will be a decrease in cardiovascular disease risk, stroke, and morbidity and mortality rate. There will be also an improvement in patient QOL due to beneficial effects of the EHD.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".