MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045623916 · doi:10.1177/0148607110382023

Omega‐3–Enriched Lipid Emulsion for Liver Salvage in Parenteral Nutrition–Induced Cholestasis in the Adult Patient

2011· article· en· W2045623916 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Jurewitsch, Geoffrey W. Gardiner, Mark Naccarato, Khursheed N. Jeejeebhoy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCholestasisParenteral nutritionLiver biopsyMedicineGastroenterologyRegimenInternal medicineSepsisLiver diseaseLipid emulsionBiopsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intrahepatic cholestasis attributed to parenteral nutrition (PN) in the adult patient is relatively rare and usually occurs in patients receiving long-term PN. This article reports the first case of an adult patient with cholestatic PN-associated liver disease without sepsis who received almost all her nutrition requirements through PN. Administration of an ω-3-enriched lipid emulsion added to the PN regimen reversed cholestasis and demonstrated histologic improvement on serial liver biopsy. The patient had failed to respond to other modalities of treatment for this condition and was deeply jaundiced. Liver biochemistry profiles returned to baseline, and follow-up liver biopsy showed that cholestasis had resolved and that the only residual changes were mild portal inflammation with no histochemical or ultrastructural progression. The PN regimen for the patient was restored to provide total estimated energy requirements and remains the principle source of the patient's nutrition to date.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations46
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral NutritionSame topicClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFrench-language works237,207