MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321378828 · doi:10.1016/j.ekir.2023.02.1074

A Randomized Trial Examining the Impact of Timing of Intradialytic Cycling on Intradialytic Hypotension

2023· article· en· W4321378828 on OpenAlexafffund
Krista Rossum, Evelyn M. Hancock, Stephanie Thompson, Ranveer Brar, Victoria J. Riehl-Tonn, Eric García, Silvia J. Leon, Monica Sharma, Emilie Ford, Paul Komenda, Claudio Rigatto, Navdeep Tangri, Jennifer M. MacRae, Clara Bohm

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney International Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsResearch ManitobaOrthopaedic Innovation CentreUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersManitoba Medical Service Foundation
KeywordsHemodialysisMedicineInterquartile rangeCyclingRandomized controlled trialDialysisConfidence intervalRate ratioBlood pressureHome hemodialysisInternal medicineCardiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Intradialytic cycling is often performed during the first half of hemodialysis because of concerns regarding increased frequency of intradialytic hypotension (IDH) late in hemodialysis. This increases exercise program resource needs and limits utility of intradialytic cycling to treat dialysis-related symptoms. Methods This multicenter, randomized, crossover trial compared IDH rate when cycling during the first half versus the second half of hemodialysis in 98 adults on maintenance hemodialysis. Group A cycled during the first half of hemodialysis for 2 weeks and subsequently during the second half for 2 weeks. In group B, the cycling schedule was reversed. Blood pressure (BP) was measured every 15 minutes throughout hemodialysis. Primary outcome was IDH rate (systolic BP [SBP] decrease of >20 mm Hg or SBP <90 mm Hg). Secondary outcomes included symptomatic IDH rate and time to recover post hemodialysis. Data were analyzed using negative binomial and gamma distribution mixed regression. Results Mean age 64.7 (SD 12.0) and 64.7 (SD 14.2) years in group A ( n = 52) and group B ( n = 46), respectively. Proportions of females were 33% in group A and 43% in group B. Median time on hemodialysis was 4.1 (interquartile range [IQR] 2.5, 6.1]) years in group A and 3.9 years (IQR 2.5, 6.7) in group B. IDH rate per 100 hemodialysis hours (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 34.2 (26.4, 42.0) and 36.0 (28.9, 43.1) during early and late intradialytic cycling, respectively ( P = 0.53). Timing of intradialytic cycling was not associated with symptomatic IDH (relative risk [RR]: 1.07 [0.75–1.53]) or time to recover post hemodialysis (odds ratio: 0.99 [0.79–1.23]). Conclusion We found no association between the rate of overall or symptomatic IDH and the timing of intradialytic cycling in patients enrolled in an intradialytic cycling program. Increased use of cycling late in hemodialysis may optimize intradialytic cycling program resource use and should be studied as a possible treatment for symptoms common in late 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKidney International ReportsSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207