Innovations in Hemodialysis Care: An Evaluation of Quality and the Patient Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hemodialysis (HD) performed in a tertiary care facility is the most prevalent and costly treatment for end-stage renal disease in Canada. This life-sustaining treatment is usually performed thrice weekly in an in-center facility. When people on HD also require a rehabilitation/complex care inpatient program, the burden of transportation for dialysis is immense to both the patient and health-care system. To improve the patient experience, create efficiency, and reduce travel costs, the renal team and a team from a rehabilitation/complex care center collaborated to provide HD services in the rehab/complex care setting. A patient/family representative was involved in all aspects of the design through to evaluation of this project. This study used realistic evaluation to examine the efficacy of this program from the perspective of the patient experience, HD staff, rehab/complex care staff and costs. The decreased travel with having dialysis on-site and adequate resources in the HD unit were the mechanisms for success in improved patient experience, quality of life and rehabilitation patient outcomes, decreased costs as well as increased communication and satisfaction.
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 | 0.020 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".