{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031172686788718457, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011875309252845126, 'mean_word_length': 5.501607717041801, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 1, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
BIA Resistance and Reactance: Correlation with Somatic Features and Peritoneal Dialysis Treatment in 17 Males and 32 Females

37 www.wjrr.org  Abstract— The comparison of basal data of males versus females showed no differences in the following parameters: age, body structure (BMI), glucose concentrations in dialysis solutions, and fat mass in kg; even fat mass calculated as percentage of weight was significantly higher in females. The same equality resulted for metabolic and nutritional variables, namely, measurements of BUN, albuminemia, triglycerides, hemoglobinemia, hematocrit, lymphocytes, C3, IgG, and for all data concerning dialysis. Females presented with higher levels of cholesterolemia and higher body water composition, particularly extracellular water with respect to the lean mass, as shown by the ratio of extracellular water (in kg) per cellular mass (in kg). An adequate prediction by the resistance and reactance of the variables previously reported resulted in significant correlations and was stated by egressions. The result was assumed to be positive when the differences between the actual and predicted variables were between the mean+2SD and the mean-2SD, and inside ± 10%; this corresponded to a range that included by default 98% of the values of an item’s distribution. In males, resistance correctly predicted reactance, BMI, the liters of dialysis solutions with 1.36% of glucose, and cellular mass (kg). In females, resistance correctly predicted the liters of dialysis solutions with 1,36% of glucose. The efficacy of the regressions greatly differed between males and females, because males attained the target only for 40% of the considered variables, while the female regressions attained the target for all the considered variables (100%). This resulted in divergence in the power of prediction of resistance and reactance between males and females, and variables of different matters resulted in significant correlations with resistance and reactance in males versus females.