MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Use of a Nursing Model to Understand Diarrhea and the Role of Probiotics in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

2007· review· en· W1967378820 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Savard, Jo‐Ann V. Sawatzky

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Nursing · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflammatory bowel diseaseMedicineDiarrheaDiseaseUlcerative colitisIntensive care medicineEtiologyPsychological interventionPopulationImmunologyInternal medicineNursingEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inflammatory bowel disease, an umbrella term used for Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis, is often accompanied with the presenting symptom of diarrhea. This symptom can be a great nuisance and emotionally distressing to the individual with inflammatory bowel disease. Although the exact etiology of inflammatory bowel disease is still unknown, interactions between the host susceptibility, mucosal immunity, and intestinal microflora are thought to be major factors. One intervention that is gaining increasing support by the research and medical community is the use of probiotics, which work on the intestinal flora by altering the bacterial composition and thereby rendering the environment unfavorable to pathogenic organisms. The human response to illness model provides an ideal organizing framework to gain a comprehensive understanding of the human response of diarrhea in the inflammatory bowel disease population. By examining the physiological, pathophysiological, behavioral, and experiential perspectives as well as individual vulnerabilities, this model establishes sound rationale to guide nursing interventions to help the individual better cope with the physical and emotional effects of having diarrhea. This model also facilitates the provision of holistic and personalized care, which may include the use of probiotics to help alleviate this distressing symptom.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology NursingSame topicGut microbiota and healthFrench-language works237,207