MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1408563464 · doi:10.1093/pch/13.6.502

Iatrogenic hyponatremia in hospitalized children: Can it be avoided?

2008· article· en· W1408563464 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Skippen, Robert Adderley, Mary Bennett, Arthur Cogswell, Norbert Froese, David Wensley

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectrolyte and hormonal disorders
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyponatremiaMedicineMedical prescriptionFluid restrictionIntensive care medicineElectrolyte DisorderIntravenous fluidFluid intakeTonicityPediatricsAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iatrogenic hyponatremia in hospitalized children is a common problem. It is usually caused by the administration of free water, either orally or through the prescription of hypotonic intravenous fluids. It can result in cerebral edema and death, and is most commonly reported in healthy children undergoing minor surgery. The current teachings and practical guidelines for maintenance fluid infusions are based on caloric expenditure data in healthy children that were derived and published more than 50 years ago. A re-evaluation of these data and more recent recognition that hospitalized children are vulnerable to hyponatremia, with its resulting morbidity and mortality rates, suggest that changes in paediatricians' approach to fluid administration are necessary. There is no single fluid therapy that is optimal for all hospitalized children. A thorough assessment of the type of fluid, volume of fluid and electrolyte requirements based on individual patient requirements, plus rigorous monitoring, is required in any child receiving intravenous fluids. The present article reviews how hyponatremia occurs and makes recommendations for minimizing the risk of iatrogenic hyponatremia.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicElectrolyte and hormonal disordersFrench-language works237,207