MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396991055 · doi:10.1681/asn.20223311s1562b

Sex, Gender, and Quality of Life in Hemodialysis

2022· article· en· W4396991055 on OpenAlexaffabout
Victoria J. Riehl-Tonn, Sandra M. Dumanski, Meghan J. Elliott, Jennifer M. MacRae, Neesh Pannu, Kara Schick‐Makaroff, Kelsea M. Drall, Taryn Gantar, Colleen M. Norris, Sofia B. Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemodialysisMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Quality (philosophy)GerontologyDemographyInternal medicineIntensive care medicineSociologyNursingPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Women on conventional hemodialysis (HD) have a lower reported quality of life (QoL) compared to men. Incremental HD, which gradually increases dialysis dose over time, is a potential strategy to improve QoL. Despite differences in QoL, current HD prescription remain sex (biology) and gender (sociocultural) blind. We aimed to determine if sex and gender-related measures (gender roles, relations and identity) were associated with QoL when initiating incremental HD (<3 sessions/week) compared to conventional HD (3 sessions/week). Methods: Patients initiating HD in Alberta, Canada, were invited to enrol (June-December 2021) in this prospective cohort study. Sex assigned at birth was obtained by self-report. Eligibility for incremental HD at initiation is determined by kidney care providers using standardized assessments. The Kidney Disease Quality of Life 36 (KDQOL-36) and the GENESIS-PRAXY Gender Questionnaires were administered at baseline and at 3-months. The physical component score (PCS) and mental component scores (MCS) of the KDQOL-36 determined QoL. The GENESIS-PRAXY creates a composite gender score that is measured on a spectrum, with lower scores consistent with behaviours ascribed to males and high scores consistent behaviours ascribed to females. Non-parametric tests analysed the association between sex and QoL by HD type. Multiple linear regressions explored the association between gender score and QoL by HD type. Results: All 48 participants identified as cisgender. There were 22 participants on conventional HD (7 female, 15 male) and 26 on incremental (13 female, 13 male) (p=0.11). There was no significant change in MCS (female p= 0.68, male: p=0.41) or PCS (female p= 0.84, male: p=0.61) after 3-months regardless of HD type. Linear regression analysis showed a significant negative association between gender score and PCS (p<0.01, R2=0.54) but not with MCS (p=0.09, R2=0.43). Conclusions: Sex was not associated with QoL in this cisgender cohort. Behaviours traditionally ascribed to females as indicated by higher gender scores were associated with decreasing QoL with regards to physical health. Understanding sex and gender differences will allow care providers to better address the needs of patients receiving HD.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→