MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Daily hemodialysis

2000· review· en· W4234428334 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Pierratos

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Nephrology & Hypertension · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsHumber River Regional HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemodialysisMedicineErythropoietinHome hemodialysisNocturnalIntensive care medicineQuality of life (healthcare)Blood pressureInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last few years there has been an increasing interest in the frequent hemodialysis regimens in the form of short daily hemodialysis and nocturnal hemodialysis. Clinical data consistently showed improved quality of life, better control of blood pressure, less need for medications including erythropoietin (EPO) and better nutrition. Although the cost of providing daily treatment is higher than the conventional hemodialysis, the overall cost of the care of the patients may be lower. Furthermore short daily and nocturnal hemodialysis will lead to resurgence of home hemodialysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.009

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Nephrology & HypertensionSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207