MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995035623 · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-56035-4

Diaphragmatic dysfunction associates with dyspnoea, fatigue, and hiccup in haemodialysis patients: a cross-sectional study

2019· article· en· W2995035623 on OpenAlexaff
Bin Wang, Qing Yin, Yingyan Wang, Yan Tu, Yu‐Chen Han, Min Gao, Mingming Pan, Yan Yang, Yufang Xue, Li Zhang, Liuping Zhang, Hong Liu, Ri‐Ning Tang, Xiaoliang Zhang, Jingjie Xiao, Xiaonan H. Wang, Bi‐Cheng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDysphagia Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceSoutheast UniversityNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineDiaphragmatic breathingDiaphragm (acoustics)Internal medicineCardiologyWastingKidney diseaseBreathingAnesthesiaPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Muscle wasting is associated with increased mortality and morbidity in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, especially in the haemodialysis (HD) population. Nevertheless, little is known regarding diaphragm dysfunction in HD patients. We conducted a cross-sectional study at the Institute of Nephrology, Southeast University, involving 103 HD patients and 103 healthy volunteers as normal control. Ultrasonography was used to evaluate diaphragmatic function, including diaphragm thickness and excursion during quiet and deep breathing. HD patients showed lower end-inspiration thickness of the diaphragm at total lung capacity (0.386 ± 0.144 cm vs. 0.439 ± 0.134 cm, p < 0.01) and thickening fraction (TF) (0.838 ± 0.618 vs. 1.127 ± 0.757; p < 0.01) compared to controls. The velocity and excursion of the diaphragm were significantly lower in the HD patients during deep breathing (3.686 ± 1.567 cm/s vs. 4.410 ± 1.720 cm/s, p < 0.01; 5.290 ± 2.048 cm vs. 7.232 ± 2.365 cm; p < 0.05). Changes in diaphragm displacement from quiet breathing to deep breathing (△m) were lower in HD patients than in controls (2.608 ± 1.630 vs. 4.628 ± 2.110 cm; p < 0.01). After multivariate adjustment, diaphragmatic excursion during deep breathing was associated with haemoglobin level (regression coefficient = 0.022; p < 0.01). We also found that the incidence of dyspnoea and hiccup and the fatigue scores, all of which were related to diaphragmatic dysfunction, were significantly higher in HD patients than in controls (all p < 0.01). Improving diaphragm function through targeted therapies may positively impact clinical outcomes in HD patients.

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)0.000
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicDysphagia Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207