Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Home enteral nutrition (HEN) is a life-sustaining therapy for patients who are unable to meet nutrient needs by oral intake, who have a functional gastrointestinal (GI) tract, and who are able to remain in their own home. The objective of this study was to identify whether the indication for HEN is related to reason for discharge from a HEN program. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all patients admitted to the multidisciplinary Northern Alberta Home Enteral Nutrition Support Program between January 1, 1999 and January 1, 2005 was performed. Detailed information on the indication for HEN, length of time on program, and reason for discharge was collected and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Over the 6-year period, 727 adult patients were admitted. Major diagnostic categories for HEN were cancer, neurological disorders, and GI disorders. Median duration of HEN for cancer patients was 122 (range, 1-1259) days, duration for neurological disorders was 187 (range, 1-1752) days, and duration for GI disorders was 161 (range, 1-1849) days. Death was the main reason for discharge in patients with cancer and neurological disorders. Patients with GI disorders were most likely to initiate oral intake and least likely to be discharged because of death. CONCLUSIONS: Indications for HEN are related to outcome-specifically, time to discontinuation of enteral nutrition and reason for discharge, including return to oral intake and death.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".