MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398233673 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfae069.831

#782 Latent profiles of patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis based on hemodynamic indicators

2024· article· en· W4398233673 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicStatistical and Computational Modeling
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemodynamicsHemodialysisMedicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and Aims Both intradialytic hypotension and intradialytic hypertension are conditions occurring frequently during hemodialysis and are associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes. However, they remain incompletely understood and poorly defined in the literature. Since intradialytic parameters are now captured automatically in electronic medical records in many institutions, machine learning could emerge as an innovative tool for hemodialysis clinical research. Latent Profile Analysis is a model-based clustering method. It allows to identify hidden subpopulations derived from a set of observed indicator variables, maximizing between-group differences and within-group similarities. Method The objectives of this study were to identify latent profiles using a set of hand-crafted indicators and to interpret these subgroups of patients in a clinically meaningful manner. We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study of adult patients receiving hemodialysis between January 2017 and December 2022 in Montreal. Given the highly heterogeneous nature of this population, we only enrolled incidental patients. The data were extracted from the NephroCare database, which is the clinical information system used by dialysis teams in our center. Sixteen indicators were derived from time series of blood pressure and heart rate measurements, capturing various patient-centric aspects of intradialytic hemodynamics, including trends, zeniths, nadirs, and time-related features. Latent Profile Analysis involved fitting a series of models, and the best model was selected based on fit indices, evaluation metrics, and clinical interpretation of the distribution of indicator within identified profiles. The primary analysis used complete-case data, and a sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of missing data through multiple imputation. Internal model validation was conducted using k-fold cross-validation. Results The selected model consisted of four profiles with varying variance and null covariance across indicators. Fig. 1 presents radar plots summarizing the identified profiles. Profile 1 included patients with prolonged early nadirs and a nadir-to-zenith transition pattern at the session level. Profile 2 was characterized by frequent nadirs and zeniths without a specific timing preference. Profile 3 comprised patients with infrequent blood pressure variations altogether. Profile 4 included patients with frequent early nadirs but no zeniths. The model demonstrated good generalization to unseen cases and exhibited relative robustness to missing data. Conclusion In this preliminary study, we demonstrated that Latent Profile Analysis can identify clinically meaningful subpopulations of hemodialysis patients based on hemodynamic indicators. The association between the identified profiles and hard clinical endpoints remains to be established.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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