MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008174984 · doi:10.1177/014860710502900274

Implementation of a Nutrition Support Protocol Increases the Proportion of Mechanically Ventilated Patients Reaching Enteral Nutrition Targets in the Adult Intensive Care Unit

2005· article· en· W2008174984 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryFoothills Medical Centre
FundersMicrosoft
KeywordsParenteral nutritionMedicineIntensive care unitEnteral administrationClinical nutritionConfidence intervalProtocol (science)Intensive careConfoundingEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the evidence that enteral feeding reduces morbidity in critically ill patients and is preferred to parenteral nutrition, the delivery of enteral nutrition (EN) is often inadequate. The purpose of this study was to determine whether implementation of an evidence-based nutrition support (NS) protocol could improve EN delivery. METHODS: An NS protocol incorporating available scientific evidence; data from a retrospective survey of 30 intensive care unit (ICU) patients; and input from dietitians, intensive care physicians, surgeons, nurses, and pharmacists was developed. The impact of this protocol was evaluated prospectively in 123 consecutive adult patients admitted to a multisystem ICU who were eligible for EN. RESULTS: The percentage of patients who received at least 80% of their estimated energy requirements during their ICU stay increased from 20% before implementation of the NS protocol to 60% after implementation (p < .001). After adjusting for confounders, those in the postimplementation group received significantly more kcal/kg/d than the preimplementation group (3.71 kcal/kg/d; 95% confidence interval, 1.64 to 5.78; p = .001). Parenteral nutrition use [corrected] was reduced in the postimplementation group (1.6 vs 13%, p = .02). There was no difference in time to initiation of enteral nutrition between groups (1.76 days preprotocol vs 1.44 days postprotocol implementation, p = .9). CONCLUSIONS: The development and use of an evidence-based NS protocol improved the proportion of enterally fed ICU patients meeting their calculated nutrition requirements.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.321 · 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