Pharmacological strategies to manage hyperkalaemia: out with the old, in with the new? Not so fast…
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the 1950s, sodium polystyrene sulphonate (SPS) has been the dominant cation exchange agent prescribed for hyperkalaemia. Clinicians have had plenty of time to learn of SPS's advantages and limitations. The demands of drug regulatory agencies regarding the incorporation of medications into the market were not so stringent then as they are today, and the efficacy and safety of SPS have been questioned. In recent years, two novel cation exchangers, patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate, have received (or are in the process of receiving) regulatory approval in multiple jurisdictions globally, after scrutiny of carefully conducted trials regarding their short-term and mid-term efficacy. In this debate, we defend the view that all three agents are likely to have similar efficacy. Harms are much better understood for SPS than for newer agents, but currently there are no data to suggest that novel agents are safer than SPS. Drug choices need to consider costs, access and numbers-needed-to-treat to prevent clinically important events; for potassium exchangers, we need trials directly examining clinically important events.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".