Variability in the clinical management of fatty acid oxidation disorders: results of a survey of Canadian metabolic physicians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is little robust empirical evidence on which to base treatment recommendations for fatty acid oxidation disorders. While consensus guidelines are important, understanding areas where there is a lack of consensus is also critical to inform priorities for future evaluative research. METHODS: We surveyed Canadian metabolic physicians on the treatment of medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase (MCAD) deficiency, very long-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase (VLCAD) deficiency, long-chain 3-hydroxyacyl-CoA dehydrogenase (LCHAD) deficiency, and mitochondrial trifunctional protein (MTP) deficiency. We ascertained physicians' opinions on the use of different interventions for the long-term management of patients as well as for the management of acute illness, focusing on identifying interventions characterized by high variability in opinions. We also investigated factors influencing treatment decisions. RESULTS: We received 18 responses (response rate 45%). Participants focused on avoidance of fasting and increased meal frequency as interventions for the management of MCAD deficiency. For the long-chain disorders, avoidance of fasting remained the most consistently endorsed intervention, with additional highly endorsed treatments differing for VLCAD versus LCHAD/MTP deficiency. L-carnitine supplementation and restriction of dietary fat were characterized by high variability in physicians' opinions, as were several interventions specific to long-chain disorders. Social factors and patient characteristics were important influences on treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings we suggest that high priority treatments for rigorous effectiveness studies could include L-carnitine supplementation (MCAD and LCHAD/MTP deficiencies), restriction of dietary fat, and, for the long-chain disorders, feeding practices for breastfed infants and the use of various supplements (essential fatty acids, carbohydrates, cornstarch, multivitamins).
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 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".