Role of the Nutrition Professional: In High-risk Obstetrics Inpatient Teams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beyond the management of gestational diabetes and weight control, limited literature exists on nutritional management in high-risk pregnancies. This study is a starting point for understanding the role of the registered dietitian (RD) in high-risk obstetrics (HRO) inpatient teams. Demographic information was gathered on Ontario HRO inpatient units and patient characteristics, and the RD's role in this setting was explored. Representatives from all six HRO units in Ontario completed a questionnaire. Five of the HRO units had an RD on the team. The RDs stated that their primary role in the unit involved providing nutrition education and support, screening patients for nutritional risk, and writing vitamin and mineral orders. This was the first study in which RDs' role in HRO inpatient units was examined. Existing literature supports the role of good nutrition in preventing and treating the conditions seen in HRO units; however, RDs' specific role remains unclear. Future studies are needed to analyze the effect of nutrition on these HRO conditions, and to support the development of best practice guidelines.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".