Quality of Life of Dialysis Patients: Exploring the Influence of Membrane Hemocompatibility and Dialysis Practices on Psychosocial and Physical Symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hemodialysis (HD) is a life-sustaining membrane-based therapy that is essential for managing kidney failure. However, it can have significant physical and psychological effects on patients due to chronic or acute consequences related to membrane bioincompatibility. End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on hemodialysis have a high incidence of psychiatric illness, particularly depression and anxiety disorders, and poor quality of life has been observed. Dialysis can also lead to physical symptoms of its own, such as fatigue, loss of appetite, anemia, low blood pressure, and fluid overload, in addition to the symptoms associated with kidney failure. Therefore, this critical review aims to comprehensively understand the impact of dialysis membrane bioincompatibility and the use of varying molecular weight cut-off membranes on the physical and psychological symptoms experienced by dialysis patients. We analyzed the latest research on the correlation between major inflammatory biomarkers released in patients’ blood due to membrane incompatibility, as well as the critical influence of low levels of hemoglobin and vital proteins such as human serum albumin due to the use of high-cut-off membranes and correlated these factors with the physical and psychological symptoms experienced by dialysis patients. Furthermore, our study aims to provide valuable insights into the impact of dialysis on critical symptoms, higher hospitalization rates, and the quality of life of First Nations, as well as child and youth dialysis patients, in addition to diabetic dialysis patients. Our goal is to identify potential interventions aiming to optimize the dialysis membrane and minimize its negative effects on patients, ultimately improving their well-being and long-term outcomes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".