Tube feeding and quality of life in children with severe neurological impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of life (QOL) of neurologically impaired children before and after gastrostomy (G) and gastrojejunostomy (GJ) tube insertion. DESIGN: This was a prospective longitudinal study of children with severe neurological impairment who underwent G or GJ tube insertion. At baseline, and at 6 and 12 months after tube insertion, parents rated (1) global QOL and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) using 10 cm visual analogue scales, with 10 representing maximal QOL and (2) HR-QOL using a questionnaire-based measure. RESULTS: Fifty patients, 45 and five of whom underwent G and GJ tube insertion, respectively, were enrolled with a median age of 591 days. Forty-two had a static neurological disorder, and eight had a progressive neurological disorder. The mean weight for age z score increased significantly over time: -2.8 at baseline and -1.8 at 12 months. The mean QOL and HR-QOL scores at baseline were 5.5 and 5.6 out of 10, respectively. There was no significant change in these scores at 6 and 12 months post-tube insertion. Children with a progressive versus a static neurological disorder had a significantly lower QOL over time. Ease of medication administration as well as feeding showed a significant improvement in scores from baseline to 12 months. Parents felt that the G and GJ tube had a positive impact on their child's health at 6 months (86%) and 12 months (84%). CONCLUSION: QOL as rated by parents did not increase following insertion of a G or GJ tube in neurologically impaired children. However, parents felt that the tube had a positive impact on their child's health, particularly with regards to feeding and administration of medications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".