The International Quotidian Dialysis Registry: Annual report 2008
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alternative hemodialysis (HD) schedules, including short-daily and nocturnal HD, continue to proliferate, with the hope of offering improved patient outcomes. Three nights per week and every other night, nocturnal HD are now being provided to more patients worldwide, both at home and in-center. However, alternative HD schedules are still experimental in most centers, and studies establishing the efficacy of these therapies with respect to major clinical outcomes are needed. Endorsed by the National Institutes of Health, the International Quotidian Dialysis Registry is an international collaboration that was established in 2002 to prospectively study large numbers of patients treated with alternate HD schedules. The Registry will ultimately allow alternate HD modalities to be compared to conventional thrice-weekly HD with respect to clinical endpoints, including mortality, using a prospective cohort study. To date, the Registry has enrolled 182, 1193, and 740 subjects from Canada, the United States, and Australia, respectively. This report is the fourth annual update and describes recruitment progress, baseline characteristics of enrolled patients, and worldwide prescription patterns.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.011 |
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".