OUTCOME IN CHILDREN UNDER 5 YEARS OF AGE WITH CONSTIPATION: A PROSPECTIVE FOLLOW‐UP STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Constipation in the pre-school child is common and causes considerable distress to children and their parents. There is a lack of information regarding prognosis in this group of patients although some are clearly at risk of developing long-term difficulties with defaecation. We have previously reported characteristics of children under 5 years of age referred to hospital over a one-year period with idiopathic constipation. We now report outcome data after 18 months of follow-up in 41 of the original cohort of 42 children. We have also summarised what we regard as good practice in managing constipation in this age group. Eighteen months after initial outpatient assessment, the symptoms of constipation were reported to have resolved in 36 (88%), although seven of these were still needing regular laxative treatment. It was our subjective impression that the five children who apparently did not improve came from families that had a greater degree of psychosocial problems and where compliance with treatment was suspect. This study shows that with simple treatment measures and ongoing support, an optimistic prognosis can be given to families from the outset. The minority of pre-school children who do not improve may benefit from a more intensive psychological approach to management.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".