Risk of hospitalization, technique failure, and death with increased training duration in 3‐days‐a‐week home hemodialysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Quality training is a core component of successful home hemodialysis (HHD) and training duration varies significantly between dialysis centers as well as at the patient level. This study aimed to assess the adverse outcomes associated with HHD training duration. METHODS: All HHD patients successfully trained in a single dialysis center between January 2005 and July 2017 were included. A multivariable multiple-events (Andersen-Gill) survival model was built to evaluate the association between training time and main adverse events, including hospitalizations, technique failure, and death on HHD. Potential confounding factors were defined a priori (age, diabetes, coronary artery disease, and year of training start). Adjusted risk of vascular interventions (arteriovenous fistula angioplasties and central venous catheter replacements) was assessed as the secondary outcome in a negative binomial regression. FINDINGS: Forty-eight patients were included in the study. Median HHD training duration was 86 (67-108) days, using a thrice weekly training schedule. Over a follow-up median time of 2.0 (0.7-3.3) years, three patients died while on HHD, 10 had a definitive transfer to HD, and 18 experienced a least 1 hospitalization (38 hospitalizations in total). Training duration was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization, technique failure, and death in unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 1.16 per month, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.24) and adjusted multiple events model (HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.43). Risk of vascular access intervention was also significantly higher with increased training time (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.03-1.64, per training month). DISCUSSION: In this single-center observational study, HHD training duration was associated with a higher risk of adverse events including, death, technique failure, hospitalizations, and vascular access intervention. Enhanced clinical follow-up and home support should be offered to these more vulnerable patients to mitigate this heightened risk.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".