Gender and Choice of Kidney Replacement Therapy: A Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The prevalence of dialysis, a life-sustaining kidney replacement therapy(KRT), is rising annually at significant economic cost. Compared to in-center dialysis, home-based dialysis is associated with improved outcomes and lower cost yet may be underutilized. Currently, patient education addressing dialysis modality options is gender-blind. Therefore, the objective is to determine if measures of gender, including identity, roles and relations, are associated with KRT choice. Methods: Exploratory mixed-methods study with online survey and semi-structured interview. Using a convenience sample, individuals with chronic kidney disease (Stage4-5) who have not yet initiated dialysis will be recruited from Kidney Care Clinics in Calgary, Canada. The exposure, gender and gender-related factors, will be measured using the Genesis-PRAXY Gender questionnaire, which encompasses gender identity, roles and relations. The outcome, participant's choice of KRT, will be measured through a survey and a semi-structured interview. Questions for survey and interview will be developed through a thorough literature review and in consultation with experts in the field. Results: Data will be reported descriptively with proportions and percentages, when applicable. Non-parametric statistical tests, such as Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U test, will be utilized to assess the association between gender-related factors and participants choice of KRT. Semi-structured interviews will be analyzed using a deductive thematic analysis where two independent reviewers will identify common themes. Conclusions: Understanding the gender-related factors associated with dialysis modality choice will influence delivery of care in a gender transformative person-centred manner.
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 | 0.048 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.020 |
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".