MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310466311 · doi:10.1177/20543581221137180

Validation of the SMH Equations for the Estimation of the Total Body Water Volume in Hemodialysis Patients

2022· article· en· W4310466311 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nazanin Noori, Arti Sharma Parpia, Ron Wald, Marc B. Goldstein

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBody waterHemodialysisCircumferenceWaistDialysisAnthropometryLimits of agreementPeritoneal dialysisPopulationBland–Altman plotBody weightNuclear medicineUrologyBody mass indexSurgeryInternal medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Online dialysis clearance monitors typically provide an accurate value for Kt. A value for V (total body water [TBW]) is required to calculate Kt/V, the measure of the adequacy of the delivered dialysis in hemodialysis (HD) patients. Using bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS), we previously developed 2 sex-specific equations for the estimation of the TBW, which we have chosen to name the St Michael's Hospital (SMH) equations. Objective: The objective of this study was to validate the SMH equations in a second distinct population of patients. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Single center hemodialysis unit at St Michael's Hospital, a tertiary care teaching hospital, in Toronto, Canada. Patients: Eighty-one adult HD patients who had been receiving conventional maintenance HD for at least 3 months. Measurements: Anthropometric measurements including weight, height, and waist circumference were collected. TBW was measured by BIS using the Body Composition Monitor (Fresenius Medical Care, Bad Homburg, Germany). Methods: The Bland-Altman method to calculate the bias and limits of agreement and the difference plot analysis were used to evaluate the difference between the BIS-TBW and the TBW derived from our equations (SMH equation) in this validation cohort. Results: values < .01, bias = 1.8 [95% CI: 1-2.6] liter). Application of SMH equations closely predicted Kt/V, based on BIS value, in all categories of waist circumference. Limitations: Small sample size, single-center, not including peritoneal dialysis patients. A larger and more heterogeneous sample with more patients at the extremes of body mass index would allow for more detailed sub-group analyses in different races and different anthropometric categories to better understand the performance of these equations in discrete sub-groups of patients. Conclusions: In maintenance HD patients, our previously derived equations to estimate the TBW using weight and waist circumference appear to be valid in a distinct patient population. Given the centrality of TBW to the calculation of small molecule clearance, the SMH equations may enhance the measurement of dialysis adequacy and inform practice.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and DiseaseSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207