Physician knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding physical activity restrictions in pediatric hemodialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Epidemiologic studies of physical activity among pediatric hemodialysis (HD) patients are lacking. A sedentary lifestyle in End-Stage Kidney Disease is associated with a higher cardiovascular mortality risk. In those patients receiving HD, time spent on dialysis and restrictions on physical activity due to access also contribute. No consensus exists regarding physical activity restrictions based on vascular access type. The aim of this study was to describe the patterns of physical activity restrictions imposed by pediatric nephrologists on pediatric HD patients and to understand the basis for these restrictions. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study involving US pediatric nephrologists using an anonymized survey through Pediatric Nephrology Research Consortium. The survey consisted of 19 items, 6 questions detailed physician characteristics with the subsequent 13 addressing physical activity restrictions. FINDINGS: A total of 35 responses (35% response rate) were received. The average years in practice after fellowship was 11.5 years. Significant restrictions were placed on physical activity and water exposure. None of the participants reported accesses damage or loss that was attributed to physical activity and sport participation. Physicians practice is based on their personal experience, standard practice at their HD center, and clinical practices they were taught. DISCUSSION: There is no consensus among pediatric nephrologists about allowable physical activity in children receiving HD. Due to the lack of objective data, individual physician beliefs have been utilized to restrict activities in the absence of any deleterious effects to accesses. This survey clearly demonstrates the need for more prospective and detailed studies to develop guidelines regarding physical activity and dialysis access in order to optimize quality of care in these children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".