Low dialysate potassium concentration is associated with prolonged recovery time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Modifiable hemodialysis treatment parameters may impact patient reported outcomes, including recovery time. Answers to the recovery question may predict the impact of treatment parameters on clinical outcomes and health related quality of life. However, the reliability of answers to the recovery question after consecutive and nonconsecutive dialysis treatments in diverse populations has not been established. Objective: To assess the reliability of this instrument and to determine if recovery time was associated with modifiable dialysis parameters, we conducted a quality assurance project in which we asked, “How long did it take you to recover from your last dialysis session?” after consecutive and nonconsecutive treatments. Methods: We asked patients the recovery question ≤ seven times. We computed polychoric correlations to assess within patient correlations. We used random intercept ordinal logistic regression models to test for associations of recovery time with patient variables. Results: We obtained answers to the recovery question in association with 1572 treatments in 364 patients. Recovery time was <2 hours in 52.1%; 2 to 7 hours in 20.9%; and >7 hours in 27.0% of treatments. Polychoric correlations demonstrated highly reliable responses within individual patients between consecutive and nonconsecutive treatments. Prolonged recovery was associated with a dialysate potassium of 1 vs. 2 mEq/L (odds ratio [OR] 2.25 {95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43–3.55}) and 1 vs. 3 mEq/L (OR 1.88 [95% CI 1.06–3.33]); vintage >6 months (OR 2.43 [95% CI 1.42–4.16]), body mass index >35 kg/m2 (OR 1.94 [95% CI 1.18–3.20]), post‐dialysis systolic blood pressure (SBP) <115 mmHg (OR 1.57 [95% CI 1.04–2.37]) and intradialytic cramps (OR 1.76 [95% CI 1.09–2.86]). There were no associations with gender, race, age, ESRD etiology, intradialytic SBP <90 mmHg, serum sodium or potassium, dialysate sodium, bicarbonate or temperature, blood flow rate, or ultrafiltration rate. Conclusions: Responses to the recovery question were reliable and low dialysate potassium was associated with prolonged recovery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.016 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".