Prediction of Mortality in Hemodialysis Patients Using Moving Multivariate Distance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is an increasingly widespread use of biomarkers in network physiology to evaluate an organism's physiological state. A recent study showed that albumin variability increases before death in chronic hemodialysis patients. We hypothesized that a multivariate statistical approach would better allow us to capture signals of impending physiological collapse/death. We proposed a Moving Multivariate Distance (MMD), based on the Mahalanobis distance, to quantify the variability of the multivariate biomarker profile as a whole from one visit to the next. Biomarker profiles from a visit were used as the reference to calculate MMD at the subsequent visit. We selected 16 biomarkers (of which 11 are measured every 2 weeks) from blood samples of 763 chronic kidney disease patients hemodialyzed at the CHUS hospital in Quebec, who visited the hospital regularly (∼every 2 weeks) to perform routine blood tests. MMD tended to increase markedly preceding death, indicating an increasing intraindividual multivariate variability presaging a critical transition. In survival analysis, the hazard ratio between the 97.5th percentile and the 2.5th percentile of MMD reached as high as 21.1 [95% CI: 14.3, 31.2], showing that higher variability indicates substantially higher mortality risk. Multivariate approaches to early warning signs of critical transitions hold substantial clinical promise to identify early signs of critical transitions, such as risk of death in hemodialysis patients; future work should also explore whether the MMD approach works in other complex systems (i.e., ecosystems, economies), and should compare it to other multivariate approaches to quantify system variability.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".