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 OpenAlexaff
Jennie Wells

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations139
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Interventions in AgingSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207