Evaluation and outcomes of a 5-year assisted peritoneal dialysis program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 2016, Peritoneal Dialysis Assist (PDA) was implemented in British Columbia, Canada, as a pilot program to allow patients with physical, cognitive and social impairments to access an independent dialysis modality. This is a presentation of the usage and 5-year clinical outcomes of our provincial assisted peritoneal dialysis (PD) program. METHODS: Patients who utilised long-term or respite PDA services in British Columbia, Canada, from 2016 to 2021 were included in this program evaluation. Incident and prevalent patient numbers were characterised annually as well as indications for PDA and patient demographics both annually and over time. Outcomes of interest included death, transfer to haemodialysis, transplantation and cessation of the PDA program but retention on PD. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-two total patients received services through the PDA program. The percentage of PD patients supported by long-term PDA service has grown to 11.2% in the most recent year. Patients spend a median of 13.6 (95% CI: 11.0, 16.1) months on long-term PDA, prolonging overall patient duration on PD by a little over a year. Of the patients who exited the long-term PDA program, 73 (37.4%) were able to utilise the service until they died. CONCLUSION: PDA is an accessible, patient-centric service with clear and standardised referral criteria. Through the implementation of a local PDA program, patients have accessed PD and may have extended their PD life span, through avoidance of in-centre haemodialysis, by over 13 months during this 5-year study period. A significant proportion of patients on long-term PDA were able to use their preferred kidney replacement modality at home until they reached end of life.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".