<i>Pediatric Feeding and Swallowing Problems</i>: An Interdisciplinary Team Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1995, Oshawa General Hospital (now Lakeridge Health Corporation, Oshawa site) developed an interdisciplinary feeding and swallowing clinic to serve children with feeding problems. After four years, a retrospective chart review of 104 subjects was completed to assess the performance of the clinic, which consists of a pediatrician, a speech-language pathologist (S-LP), an occupational therapist (OT), and a registered dietitian (RD). Goals were set at the initial and follow-up visits. These goals were individualized according to client needs and were related to improvements in growth and/or feeding abilities. During this period, 176 of 232, or 75.9% (70-81, 95% confidence interval), of the initial goals were attained by the first follow-up visit. Progress in the clinic, as measured by the number of goals achieved by the first follow-up visit, was further analyzed according to the patient age group/category (i.e., infant, toddler, and child) and by the health care professional (i.e., S-LP, OT, and RD) to ascertain and compare success rates in these groups and professionals. The overall success rates in the patient age groups (p=0.07) and among the different professionals (p=0.92) were not significantly different. In short, the interdisciplinary team approach proved successful in treating feeding problems in patients referred to the clinic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".