Home Dialysis Among Elderly Patients: Outcomes and Future Directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elderly patients who receive home dialysis (peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis) may have reduced survival compared to younger patients. Therefore, it is important to ascertain the goals of home dialysis in the elderly rather than simply fixate on standard metrics such as technique survival. As Canada's population continues to age, the prevalence of end-stage kidney disease among the elderly population is increasing. Patients with multiple comorbidities are now surviving long enough to be started on dialysis. Although home dialysis has been associated with better survival and improved quality of life, its impact on the frail and elderly populations require further elucidation. Home dialysis patients can either independently perform tasks or have support in the home to safely conduct dialysis. Moreover, patients burdened with frailty and multiple comorbidities who lack support in the home may not be able to perform home dialysis safely. Innovative strategies to improve accessibility to home-based therapies need further exploration. In addition, the concept of goal-directed dialysis promotes more individualized treatment. Future continuous quality improvement initiatives must examine if goal-directed dialysis leads to better quality of life outcomes in the elderly.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".