Volume Management by Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Management of fluid balance is one of the basic but vital tasks in the care of critically ill patients. Hypovolemia results in a decrease in cardiac output and tissue perfusion and may lead to progressive multiple organ dysfunction, including the development of acute renal injury (AKI). However, in an effort to reverse pre-renal oliguria, it is not uncommon for patients with established oliguric acute renal failure, particularly when associated with sepsis, to receive excessive fluid resuscitation, leading to fluid overload. In patients with established oliguria, renal replacement therapy may be required to treat hypervolemia. Safe prescription of fluid loss during RRT requires intimate knowledge of the patient's underlying condition, understanding of the process of ultrafiltration and close monitoring of the patient's cardiovascular response to fluid removal. To preserve tissue perfusion in patients with AKI, it is important that RRT be prescribed in a way that optimizes fluid balance by removing fluid without compromising the effective circulating fluid volume. In patients who are clinically fluid overloaded, it is equally important that the amount of fluid removed be as exact as possible. Fluid balance errors can occur as a result of inappropriate prescription, operator error or machine error. Some CRRT machines have potential for significant fluid errors if alarms can be overridden. Threshold values for fluid balance error have been developed which can be used to predict the severity of harm. It is important that RRT education programs emphasize the risk associated with fluid balance errors and with overriding machine alarms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".