Cognitive impairment in different hemodialysis techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Cognitive impairment is one of the most common, often untreated, comorbidities affecting patients with chronic kidney disease treated with hemodialysis. Increased mortality, poor compliance, depression, and poor quality of life were all linked to cognitive impairment in the hemodialysis population. The intradialytic exercise proved to be beneficial in improving patients’ quality of life, among other positive effects. Cooling dialysate has various positive effects, including improved patients’ mood and decreased hypotensive episodes during hemodialysis. The study aims to assess the effect of intradialytic exercise and cool hemodialysis on cognitive function in patients on hemodialysis. Results The study showed no significant effect of both interventions on the patient’s cognitive functions. However, cooling dialysate showed an improvement in the severity of depressive symptoms by Beck’s Depression Inventory II ( p = 0.02). On the other hand, Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview showed an increase of patients diagnosed with depression in the intradialytic exercise group. Conclusions Both interventions had no significant effect on the mean scores of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, which are lower in our sample than in the general population (23.9–25). Potential implications include the importance of managing psychiatric comorbidities in patients on hemodialysis. Cooling dialysate can be adopted to alleviate depressive symptoms in patients on 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".