MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053762811 · doi:10.1177/0148607105029002108

Assessing the Metabolic and Clinical Consequences of Early Enteral Feeding in the Malnourished Patient

2005· article· en· W2053762811 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Flesher, Katharine A. Archer, Barbara D. Leslie, Robert A. McCollom, Grzegorz P. Martinka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsRichmond Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnteral administrationMedicineRefeeding syndromeParenteral nutritionIntensive care medicinePediatricsInternal medicineMalnutrition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It is often thought that enteral feeding should be initiated slowly in those who are severely malnourished. This descriptive study examined the effect of an enteral feeding protocol on the typical metabolic consequences seen in refeeding syndrome. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on 51 patients who had been placed on hospital-wide enteral feeding and electrolyte replacement protocols over a 9-month period to determine whether there were any negative clinical consequences to early feeding. RESULTS: Goal feeding rate was achieved within 17.6 +/- 8.7 hours. Forty patients (80%) developed depletions in phosphate, magnesium, or potassium after initiation of enteral feeding, including 93% of those deemed "at risk" and 74% of those "not at risk." All patients received electrolyte replacement according to protocols, and no patients showed any negative clinical effect. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that malnourished patients at risk for refeeding syndrome can be fed early without observed negative clinical consequences. An electrolyte replacement protocol may be an effective means of minimizing the electrolyte imbalances associated with early feeding. It also demonstrated the significance of applying such protocols to all patients requiring enteral support, as current methods of assessing "risk"for refeeding syndrome may be inadequate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations35
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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