MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128121022 · doi:10.1177/0884533614562840

Nutrition Adequacy in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery

2014· article· en· W2128121022 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

VenueNutrition in Clinical Practice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEnhanced Recovery After Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMealElective surgeryObservational studySurgeryEmergency medicineGeneral surgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A prospective observational study was initiated to determine the prevalence of nutrition risk before surgery and assess nutrition adequacy of food choices after elective colorectal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment was used to screen all preoperative clinic patients (n = 70) scheduled for elective colorectal surgery. Adequacy of dietary intake (n = 40) was determined for the first 3 postoperative days by estimating total energy and protein intake from leftover food at each meal based on standard hospital portions with food composition tables. Food access questionnaire provided a rationale for observed food intake. All patients received Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) and room service system care. RESULTS: Before surgery, 63% of patients were considered well-nourished, 29% suspected or moderately undernourished, and 8% severely undernourished. Fifty-one percent of patients scored > 4 on the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment, indicating requirement for dietary intervention or symptom management. On average, 77% ± 27%, 63% ± 28%, and 92% ± 39% of energy requirements were met on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3, respectively; conversely, 55% ± 24%, 43% ± 16%, and 45% ± 12% of protein requirements were met. Most common reasons for missed meals included loss of appetite and feelings of fatigue or worry. Preoperative nutrition risk tended to result in a greater 30-day hospital readmission rate compared to well-nourished patients (P = .07). CONCLUSIONS: A third of patients scheduled for elective colorectal surgery were at nutrition risk. An acceptable intake of dietary protein was not achieved during the first 3 days of hospitalization. Preoperative nutrition education, as part of Enhanced Recovery Programs, may be useful to optimize nutrition status before surgery to mitigate clinical consequences associated with undernutrition and empower patients to make adequate food choices for recovery. NCT 01727570.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.340 · 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