Nutrition Assessment of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Malnutrition among inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) subjects is well documented in the literature and may arise from factors including inadequate dietary intake, malabsorption, and disease activity. The aims of this present study were to complete a comprehensive nutrition assessment of IBD subjects. METHODS: One hundred twenty-six consecutive adults with IBD completed anthropometric measures, 4-day food-record assessments, and biochemical markers of nutrition. RESULTS: A high prevalence of inadequate nutrient consumption was observed: vitamin E (63%), vitamin D (36%), vitamin A (26%), calcium (23%), folate (19%), iron (13%), and vitamin C (11%). Several biochemical deficiencies were also observed. The prevalence of subnormal serum levels was hemoglobin (40%), ferritin (39.2%), vitamin B(6) (29%), carotene (23.4%), vitamin B(12) (18.4%), vitamin D (17.6%), albumin (17.6%), and zinc (15.2%). Dietary intake was not correlated with serum levels in all instances; there was a highly significant correlation between diet and serum values of vitamin B(12), folate, and vitamin B(6) for all IBD subjects, independent of disease activity, and for vitamin D among all IBD subjects in remission. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects with IBD have a high rate of iron deficiency and anemia, which are most likely not secondary to diet. Supplementing with iron should be warranted only if a true iron deficiency exists. The routine evaluation of serum vitamin B(6) and vitamin D levels is recommended. Routine multivitamin supplementation is warranted in IBD in view of numerous dietary and biochemical deficiencies observed among adult IBD subjects. Even if subjects with IBD seem to be well nourished, they may harbor vitamin/mineral deficiencies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".