Experience of Sustained Low-Efficiency Dialysis (SLED) in an Intensive Care Unit of a Quaternary Care Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In critically ill patients, sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) has become a viable option for treating acute kidney injury (AKI) instead of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). This study aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes in critically ill patients receiving SLED. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In our ICU, we performed a retrospective cohort study on hemodynamically unstable patients requiring dialysis in the form of SLED. Demographics, clinical, and biochemical variables were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 58 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age was 48.58 ± 15 with a male-to-female ratio of 3:1. Higher APACHE II score, high international normalized ratio, thrombocytopenia, and septic shock were found to be poor prognostic markers, with an overall observed mortality of 56.9%. CONCLUSION: SLED can be considered as an alternative to CCRT for selected hemodynamically unstable patients requiring renal replacement therapy.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".