MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081004362 · doi:10.2147/ciia.2006.1.1.67

Nutrition and aging: assessment and treatment of compromised nutritional status in frail elderly patients

2006· article· en· W2081004362 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

VenueClinical Interventions in Aging · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalnutritionMedicineContext (archaeology)GerontologyIntensive care medicineGeriatricsNutrition DisordersWeight lossPopulationEnvironmental healthObesityPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nutrition is an important determinant of health in persons over the age of 65. Malnutrition in the elderly is often underdiagnosed. Careful nutritional assessment is necessary for both the successful diagnosis and development of comprehensive treatment plans for malnutrition in this population. The purpose of this article is to provide clinicians with an educational overview of this essential but often underecognized aspect of geriatric assessment. This article will review some common issues in nutrition for the elderly in both hospital and community settings. The complexity and impact of multiple comorbidities on the successful nutritional assessment of elderly patients is highlighted by using case scenarios to discuss nutritional issues common to elderly patients and nutritional assessment tools. Three case studies provide some context for an overview of these issues, which include the physiology of aging, weight loss, protein undernutrition, impaired cognition, malnutrition during hospitalization, screening procedures, and general dietary recommendations for patients 65 years of age and older.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.336 · 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