MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2930876032 · doi:10.1111/sdi.12809

Common errors in temporary hemodialysis catheter insertion

2019· editorial· en· W2930876032 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Samaha, Edward G. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Dialysis · 2019
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineHemodialysis CatheterCatheterPatient safetyVascular accessHemodialysisSurgeryHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-tunneled hemodialysis catheter (NTHC) insertion is an essential skill for nephrology practice and remains a requirement of training. However, improper insertion technique can increase the risk of potentially fatal infectious and mechanical complications. Evidence-based strategies can reduce the rates of such complications and should be integrated into practice and training. Ultrasound (US) guidance should routinely be used for NTHC insertion at the femoral and internal jugular sites (with avoidance of the subclavian site). Nephrologists should receive proper training in the use of US for line insertion. With respect to other aspects of the procedure, proper insertion technique readily prevents guidewire-induced arrhythmias. In addition, adherence to infection-control guidelines results in a sustainable reduction in bloodstream infections. All these aspects of NTHC insertion may be best taught and evaluated through a program that includes simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) training. As a separate issue, nephrologists (and intensivists) should be aware that a dysfunctional catheter should be replaced at a new site rather than being changed over a guidewire. This review of common errors related to NTHC insertion seeks to highlight evidence-based approaches to practice and training.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.318 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in DialysisSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207