MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084162706 · doi:10.34067/kid.0004052020

Characteristics and Effectiveness of Dedicated Care Programs for Patients Starting Dialysis: A Systematic Review

2020· review· en· W3084162706 on OpenAlex
Mirna Attalla, Zoe K. Friedman, Sandra McKeown, Ziv Harel, Jay Hingwala, Amber O. Molnar, Patrick A. Norman, Samuel A. Silver

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney360 · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalKingston Health Sciences CentreMcMaster UniversityQueen's University
FundersKidney Foundation of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Society of Nephrology
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionCINAHLObservational studyMEDLINEDialysisRandomized controlled trialIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineSystematic reviewHemodialysisMeta-analysisTransplantationInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Dedicated care programs that provide increased support to patients starting dialysis are increasingly being used to reduce the risk of complications. The objectives of this systematic review were to determine the characteristics of existing programs and their effect on patient outcomes. Methods We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL from database inception to November 20, 2019 for English-language studies that evaluated dedicated care programs for adults starting maintenance dialysis in the inpatient or outpatient setting. Any study design was eligible, but we required the presence of a control group and prespecified patient outcomes. We extracted data describing the nature of the interventions, their components, and the reported benefits. Results The literature search yielded 12,681 studies. We evaluated 66 full texts and included 11 studies ( n =6812 intervention patients); eight of the studies evaluated hemodialysis programs. All studies were observational, and there were no randomized controlled trials. The most common interventions included patient education ( n =11) and case management ( n =5), with nurses involved in nine programs. The most common outcomes were mortality ( n =8) and vascular access ( n =4), with only three studies reporting on the uptake of home dialysis and none on transplantation. We identified four high-quality studies that combined patient education and case management; in these programs, the relative reduction in 90-day mortality ranged from 22% (95% CI, −3% to 41%) to 49% (95% CI, 33% to 61%). Pooled analysis was not possible due to study heterogeneity. Conclusions Few studies have evaluated dedicated care programs for patients starting dialysis, especially their effect on home dialysis and transplantation. Whereas multidisciplinary care models that combine patient education with case management appear to be promising, additional prospective studies that involve patients in their design and execution are needed before widespread implementation of these resource-intensive programs.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.286 · 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