MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915480770 · doi:10.1007/s40620-019-00593-3

A cardiac magnetic resonance imaging study of long-term and incident hemodialysis patients

2019· article· en· W2915480770 on OpenAlexaff
Richard B. Thompson, Paolo Raggi, Natasha Wiebe, Martin Ugander, Jannike Nickander, Scott Klarenbach, Stephanie Thompson, Marcello Tonelli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nephrology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParathyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemodialysisCardiologyInternal medicineEjection fractionMagnetic resonance imagingHazard ratioFibrosisCardiac magnetic resonance imagingCohortProspective cohort studyHeart failureRadiologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular morphology and function in long-term survivors of hemodialysis are not well described. METHODS: Single-center cross-sectional study nested within a prospective cohort study of 15 long-term (> 7.5 years) and 15 matched incident (< 6 months) hemodialysis patients with 15 external matched controls. Evaluations included heart structure, function and fibrosis (myocardial longitudinal relaxation time, native T1), and aortic dimensions and elasticity, using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). Coronary artery calcification (CAC) scores were evaluated from computed tomography (CT). RESULTS: Incident hemodialysis patients had significantly increased left ventricular mass, greater aortic dimensions and reduced aortic distensibility compared to long-term survivors, whereas the CAC score was significantly higher in long-term than incident patients, median (95% CI) 1127 (10-3861) vs 14 (0-268). Both incident and long-term hemodialysis groups had significantly higher native T1 values compared to controls, mean (95% CI) 1300 ms (1273-1326), 1274 ms (1243-1305) versus 1224 ms (1202-1246), respectively, suggesting interstitial fibrosis or edema. Compared to controls, both hemodialysis groups also had significantly lower left ventricular ejection fraction: 48.7% (43.6-53.9), 54.0% (48.3-59.7) versus 62.2% (58.0-66.4) and longitudinal strain: 14.0% (11.7-16.2), 15.2% (12.7-17.7) versus 19.6% (17.8-21.5). CONCLUSIONS: Incident hemodialysis patients had larger left ventricular mass and unfavorable aortic structure and function compared to long-term survivors, despite a lower CAC burden. Long-term survivors, despite normal ventricular mass and volumes, had signs of fibrosis or edema, given their significantly increased native T1 values.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NephrologySame topicParathyroid Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207