Bibliographic record
Abstract
Idea of home hemodialysis was born together with the development of chronic maintenance dialysis therapy.Nevertheless many constrains -economical, social and psychological caused that this method was used in very small percentage of patients treated with maintenance hemodialysis.Increase of interest connected with home hemodialysis started 10-15 years ago together with intensification of dialysis treatment aiming to achievie better results of this therapy.During this time many papers showed quite enthusiastic results suggesting much better metabolic and medical equilibrium connected with diminished cardiovascular risk together with better patients survival and quality of life.Unfortunately nearly all these information were based on obser-vational, nonrandomized studies performed in quite small groups of patients.It was the reason that nephrological community with great interest waited for the results of studies performed by American-Canadian group Frequent Hemodialysis Network (FHN) based on the experience of more than 50 dialysis units.Nevertheless first published recently FHN reports did not confirm presented above positive results of observational studies.One may hope that further data from long-term observation performed by FHN group will allow to provide real evaluation of intensive home hemodialysis taking into account both medical and farmaeconomical aspect of this form of therapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.229 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".