Are CSN and NKF-K/DOQI mineral metabolism guidelines for hemodialysis patients achievable? Results from a provincial renal program.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The calcium, phosphorus, and parathyroid hormone targets recommended by the Canadian Society of Nephrology (CSN) encompass a wider range of values as compared to the National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-K/DOQI) guidelines. We sought to compare mineral metabolism parameters within the Manitoba Renal Program (MRP) to the CSN and NKF-K/DOQI guidelines. Medication use was also examined. METHODS: All hemodialysis patients in Manitoba were evaluated. Values for serum albumin, phosphorus, calcium, intact parathyroid hormone (PTH) and pertinent medications were collected. RESULTS: Five hundred and forty-six patients were included in the analysis. Fifty-three per cent to 81% of MRP patients met individual CSN targets. However, only 26% of patients achieved all targets, despite high usage of phosphate (85.5% calcium carbonate, 16.1% sevelamer, 1.3% aluminum) and PTH-lowering drug therapies (30.2% calcitriol, 2.7% cinacalcet). CONCLUSION: Only a small proportion of patients were able to achieve all three CSN mineral metabolism targets simultaneously. The majority of outliers presented with hyperphosphatemia or hypoparathyroidism.
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 | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".