MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Does Perioperative Immunonutrition Reduce Postoperative Complications in Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer Undergoing Operations?

2004· review· en· W2048804774 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

VenueNutrition Reviews · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerioperativeMedicineEnteral administrationParenteral nutritionGastrointestinal cancerIncidence (geometry)SurgeryGastrointestinal tractCancerElective surgeryPreoperative careCancer surgeryAnesthesiaInternal medicineColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perioperative immune modulation using specialized enteral diets containing specific immunonutrients may improve postoperative outcomes in critically ill patients compared with standard formulas. A study from Italy involving 305 patents with histologically confirmed cancer of the gastrointestinal tract undergoing major elective surgery and preoperative weight loss < 10% demonstrated that a specialized preoperative oral formula enriched with arginine, omega-3 fatty acids, and RNA for 5 days before surgery with no nutritional support postoperatively (preoperative group) was as effective as pre- and postoperative administration of the same enriched formula (perioperative group) in decreasing the incidence of postoperative infections and length of hospital stay. Both pre- and perioperative immunonutritional strategies were superior to the conventional approach (no artificial nutrition perioperatively).

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.332 · 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