MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415592684 · doi:10.1177/08968608251385614

Incremental start and clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis: International results from PDOPPS

2025· article· en· W4415592684 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ashik Hayat, Melissa S Cheetham, Yeoungjee Cho, Junhui Zhao, Keith McCullough, Douglas S. Fuller, Rathika Krishnasamy, Neil Boudville, Ana Elizabeth Figueiredo, Yasuhiko Ito, Talerngsak Kanjanabuch, Jeffrey Perl, Ronald L. Pisoni, Cheuk‐Chun Szeto, Isaac Teitelbaum, Graham Woodrow, Ken Tsuchiya, David W. Johnson, Louis Huang

Bibliographic record

VenuePeritoneal Dialysis International · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeritoneal dialysisPeritonitisDialysisContinuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysisMedical prescriptionRenal replacement therapyProportional hazards modelLogistic regressionProspective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The impact of incremental peritoneal dialysis (PD) on outcomes is poorly understood, and there is a paucity of evidence informing best practices regarding the dialysis dose at the commencement of PD. This international prospective cohort study aimed to compare PD prescription practices at dialysis commencement and their subsequent association with clinical outcomes. Methods Adult patients who started PD for less than three months at the time of enrolment in the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS) between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2017 were included. Patients were defined as initiating incremental PD if prescribed a total of <4 exchanges/day for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) or, with dry days or having PD less than seven days per week for automated peritoneal dialysis (APD). All other prescriptions were considered standard PD. The primary outcome was the transfer to haemodialysis (HD). Secondary outcomes included peritonitis rate, time to first peritonitis and mortality. Logistic regression analysed PD uptake and the Cox proportional hazards regression model analysed HD transfer, peritonitis and patient survival. Results Overall, 1365 PD patients from 128 facilities across seven countries were included. Fewer individuals started on incremental PD than standard PD (37% vs 63%, p < 0.001). Higher incremental PD uptake was associated with receiving treatment in Japan (odds ratio [OR] 2.35, 95% CI 1.05–5.26, p = 0.04; ref: Canada), age >75 years (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.02–2.24, p = 0.04), icodextrin use (OR 8.54, 95% CI 6.26–11.64, p < 0.001), lower serum creatinine concentration at PD start (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01–1.01, p = 0.007) and higher number of PD patients at a facility (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00–1.01, p = 0.02). Crude HD transfer rates for the incremental and standard PD groups were 0.14 (95% CI, 0.12–0.16) and 0.15 (95% CI, 0.13–0.17) per patient-year of follow-up, respectively (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.75–1.15; p = 0.49). There was no significant difference in the hazard of HD transfer between the incremental and standard PD groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% CI 0.68–1.12, p = 0.29). There were also no differences between the two groups concerning peritonitis and mortality. Conclusions Incremental PD start was prescribed in approximately one-third of patients and, in low certainty evidence, was associated with comparable risks of HD transfer, peritonitis and death.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeritoneal Dialysis InternationalSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207