MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403412378 · doi:10.1016/j.xkme.2024.100916

Vascular Access for Home Hemodialysis: A Perspective on Tunneled Central Venous Catheters at Home

2024· review· en· W4403412378 on OpenAlexaff
Michael A. Aragon, Osama El Shamy, Sijie Zheng, Glenn M. Chertow, Joel D. Glickman, Eric D. Weinhandl, Paul Komenda, Stephan Dunning, Frank Liu, Charmaine E. Lok

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney Medicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVascular accessHome hemodialysisHemodialysisVenous accessMedicinePerspective (graphical)Intensive care medicineCardiologyInternal medicineCatheterSurgeryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expansion of home hemodialysis (HHD) provides an opportunity to improve clinical outcomes, reduce cost of care, and address the staffing challenges currently faced in caring for patients with kidney failure on replacement therapy. To increase HHD expansion, current practices and barriers to home dialysis must be examined and addressed. One such barrier is vascular access for HHD; although tunneled hemodialysis central venous catheters (CVCs) have been used for decades, physicians still hesitate to send patients home without a mature, functional arteriovenous access. An expert panel of clinicians was convened by Outset Medical, a manufacturer of hemodialysis systems, to review the literature and generate consensus recommendations regarding the use of CVCs for HHD. Consistent with the most recent Kidney Disease Outcomes vascular access guidelines, the end-stage kidney disease life plan should be created via shared decision making for modality choices, with the corresponding dialysis access individualized for the patient, and for whom a CVC may represent the most appropriate vascular access to provide HHD.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.347 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKidney MedicineSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207