MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978839341 · doi:10.1177/014860710803200188

Thromboembolism in Infants and Children With Gastrointestinal Failure Receiving Long‐Term Parenteral Nutrition

2008· review· en· W1978839341 on OpenAlexaff
Vered Kakzanov, Paul Monagle, Anthony K.C. Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationMcMaster Children's HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineParenteral nutritionThrombosisIntensive care medicinePopulationIntestinal failureComplicationVenous thrombosisVenous thromboembolismPediatricsSurgeryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thromboembolism is an established complication of long-term parenteral nutrition (PN) administration which requires central venous lines in the pediatric population. Predisposing factors that increase the risk of thrombosis, as well as prophylaxis and treatment guidelines in this specific population, are not clearly defined. We performed a computerized search of PubMed, OVID databases, and pertinent articles from reference lists of related review papers. This review summarizes currently available data on the rates of thromboembolism in the pediatric population receiving long-term PN and concludes that control of factors such as location of catheter, duration of nutrition support, and prophylaxis with heparin or anticoagulants may reduce the rates of thrombosis in this patient population, although most data on the matter are inconclusive.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations35
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral NutritionSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207