MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177687924 · doi:10.4103/cjrm.cjrm_4_20

Intravenous iron therapy in a rural hospital: A retrospective chart review

2021· review· en· W3177687924 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Len Kelly, Ribal Kattini, Jenna Poirier, Lauren Minty, Danielle LaJuenesse, Sharen Madden, Robert Minty, Sydney Larsen, Ruben Hummelen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Rural Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIron Metabolism and Disorders
Canadian institutionsNOSM University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntravenous ironMedicineIron sucroseDosingPediatricsIron deficiencyAnemiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Intravenous iron infusion therapy is commonly delivered in rural hospitals, but there are no common guidelines for dosing or choice of agent. The objective of the study was to understand present practice and alternate therapies and develop practical recommendations for small hospital use. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of all non-dialysis patients aged 15 years or older who received iron replacement therapy at Sioux Lookout Meno Ya Win Health Centre from May 2013 to May 2019 and a literature review of available iron preparations. RESULTS: Of the 147 patients who received intravenous iron replacement, 75 were administered a single dose of 200 mg or 500 mg iron sucrose. Commonly used in pregnant patients, an increase in haemoglobin by an average of 9.2 g/L followed a 200 mg dose and 12.5 g/L after 500 mg. The 3-h infusion time for the 500 mg dose consumed considerably more nursing resources. Non-pregnant patients can be transfused more effectively with iron maltoside which can efficiently deliver larger doses of iron. CONCLUSION: We recommend iron maltoside for efficient intravenous iron replacement in non-pregnant patients and single or multiple doses of 200 mg iron sucrose during pregnancy.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.306
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Rural MedicineSame topicIron Metabolism and DisordersFrench-language works237,207