Do Hyponatremia or Its Underlying Mechanisms Associate With Mortality Risk in Observational Data?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Whether unaccounted determinants of hyponatremia, rather than water excess per se, primarily associate with mortality in observational studies has not been explicitly examined. Design: Retrospective cohort study of the association between hyponatremia and mortality, stratified by outpatient diuretic use in three strata. Setting: An inception cohort of 13,661 critically ill patients from a tertiary medical center. Measurements and Main Results: Admission serum sodium concentrations, obtained within 12 hours of admission to the ICU, were the primary exposure. Hyponatremia was associated with 1.82 (95% CI, 1.56–2.11; p < 0.001) higher odds of mortality, yet differed according to outpatient diuretic use (multiplicative interaction between thiazide and serum sodium < 133 mEq/L; p = 0.002). Although hyponatremia was associated with a three-fold higher (odds ratio, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.32–4.17; p < 0.001) odds of mortality among those prescribed loop diuretics, no increase of risk was observed among thiazide diuretic users (odds ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.47–1.51; p = 0.63). When examined as a continuous variable, each one mEq/L higher serum sodium was associated with 8% (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90–0.94; p < 0.001) lower odds of mortality in loop diuretic patients and 5% (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93–0.96, p < 0.001) lower in diuretic naïve patients, but was not associated with mortality risk among thiazide users (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95–1.02; p = 0.45). Conclusions: Hyponatremia is not uniformly associated with increased mortality, but differs according to diuretic exposure. Our results suggest that the underlying pathophysiologic factors that lead to water excess, rather water excess itself, account in part for the association between hyponatremia and poor outcomes. More accurate estimations about the association between hyponatremia and outcomes might influence clinical decision-making.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".