Pilot study to reduce interdialytic weight gain by provision of low‐sodium, home‐delivered meals in hemodialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Patients with kidney failure undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (HD) therapy are routinely counseled to reduce dietary sodium intake to ameliorate sodium retention, volume overload, and hypertension. However, low-sodium diet trials in HD are sparse and indicate that dietary education and behavioral counseling are ineffective in reducing sodium intake. This study aimed to determine whether 4 weeks of low-sodium, home-delivered meals in HD patients reduces interdialytic weight gain (IDWG). Secondary outcomes included changes in dietary sodium intake, thirst, xerostomia, blood pressure, volume overload, and muscle sodium concentration. METHODS: ) were enrolled in this study. Participants followed a usual (control) diet for the first 4 weeks followed by 4 weeks of three low-sodium, home-delivered meals per day. We measured IDWG, hydration status (bioimpedance), standardized blood pressure (BP), food intake (3-day dietary recall), and muscle sodium (magnetic resonance imaging) at baseline (0 M), after the 4-week period of usual diet (1 M), and after the meal intervention (2 M). FINDINGS: The low-sodium meal intervention significantly reduced IDWG when compared to the control period (-0.82 ± 0.14 kg; 95% confidence interval, -0.55 to -1.08 kg; P < 0.001). There were also 1 month (1 M) to 2 month (2 M) reductions in dietary sodium intake (-1687 ± 297 mg; P < 0.001); thirst score (-4.4 ± 1.3; P = 0.003), xerostomia score (-6.7 ± 1.9; P = 0.002), SBP (-18.0 ± 3.6 mmHg; P < 0.001), DBP (-5.9 ± 2.0 mmHg; P = 0.008), and plasma phosphorus -1.55 ± 0.21 mg/dL; P = 0.005), as well as a 0 M to 2 M reduction in absolute volume overload (-1.08 ± 0.33 L; P = 0.025). However, there were no significant changes in serum or tissue sodium (all P > 0.05). DISCUSSION: Low-sodium, home-meal delivery appears to be an effective method for improving volume control and blood pressure in HD patients. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to examine the long-term effects of home-delivered meals on these outcomes and to assess cost-effectiveness.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".