Dialysis modality and mortality in polycystic kidney disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Identifying the appropriate modality between hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an unresolved issue in polycystic kidney disease (PKD) patients. This study aims to illustrate whether the mortality and survival are different among individuals receiving HD comparing PD. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure about cohort studies involving PKD patients with end stage renal disease and comparing HD with PD. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous data. Primary outcomes were the mortality and survival (not the technique survival). FINDINGS: Eight studies involving 7685 PKD patients were identified. There were no significant differences in mortality (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.84-1.34, P = 0.61) and 5-year survival rate (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80-1.22, P = 0.90) between HD and PD. PD was not associated with higher risks of abdominal infections and hernia. However, HD was associated with a higher incidence of renal cyst hemorrhage (RR 2.53, 95% CI 1.05-6.12, P = 0.04). DISCUSSION: There are no significant differences of mortality and survival between different dialysis modalities in PKD. PD may be as successful as HD for PKD patients receiving renal replacement therapy.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".