Prevention of Weight Loss in Dementia with Comprehensive Nutritional Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether body weight can be maintained or improved in dementia residents of special care units (SCUs) using a comprehensive intervention strategy. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental with an interventional site and a noninterventional site. SETTING: Four SCUs in two long-term care facilities in Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: The intervention site included 33 residents; the comparison site included 49 residents. MEASUREMENTS: Weight change over time was the primary outcome. Three time periods were compared: 9-month baseline period, 9-month intervention period (enhanced dietitian monitoring and menu changes at intervention site), and 12-month postintervention period (only menu changes at intervention site). Comparisons were made within and between sites. Full nutritional assessments were completed for the intervention group. Medical charts and basic anthropometric, behavioral, and cognitive measures were completed in both groups to determine baseline site differences. Weight change over time was analyzed with a repeated measures analysis, controlling for various covariates. Bivariate analyses were completed for other outcomes of death, number of infections, falls, and hospital days. RESULTS: The intervention period that included the dietitian time and menu changes significantly promoted weight gain, compared with the standard treatment at the comparison facility. Other covariates of pacing, type of dementia, sex, age, number of comorbid conditions, and medications were also significant predictors of weight change. Weight gain or maintenance regardless of site was associated with survival. CONCLUSION: Body weight can be maintained in residents of SCUs regardless of pacing and other clinical characteristics. The comprehensive intervention of clinical dietitian time and an enhanced menu designed to be individualized for ambulatory people with dementia promoted significant gains in body weight. A minimum 5% weight gain is associated with survival in these residents of SCUs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".