MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089485576 · doi:10.1002/pbc.21415

Assessment of protein nutritional status in children

2007· review· en· W2089485576 on OpenAlexaff
Paul B. Pencharz

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Blood & Cancer · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBody Composition Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLean body massTransferrinAlbuminBody mass indexBlood proteinsNitrogen balancePhysiologySerum albuminBody weightInternal medicineEndocrinologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When considering the effects of disease on nutritional status it is useful to think of the body consisting of lean mass and fat mass. The latter relates to energy status and the former to protein nutritional status. In addition, childhood growth in length/height is to a high degree dependent upon having an adequate protein intake. If insufficient non-protein energy is fed, then protein is used to help meet energy needs. Hence achieving an optimum protein nutritional status also requires receiving sufficient energy. Assessment of protein nutritional status starts with measurement of length/height and weight in relationship to growth standards. Next comes using mid-upper arm parameters in which the measurement of muscle area or circumference is a reflection of protein nutritional status while triceps skin-fold thickness is a measurement of energy status. Serum albumin remains the number one short term parameter reflecting protein nutritional status followed by serum transferrin. Plasma amino acid profiles can be measured but are mostly dependent on recent dietary intake and so are hard to interpret. Classically, nitrogen balance has been used as a reflection of dietary protein intake. While it has been used extensively on a research basis its clinical applicability is limited.

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)0.001
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Blood & CancerSame topicBody Composition Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207