Acute Hyponatremia Related to Intravenous Fluid Administration in Hospitalized Children: An Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop hyponatremia (plasma sodium concentration [P(Na)] <136 mmol/L), one needs a source of water input and antidiuretic hormone secretion release to diminish its excretion. The administration of hypotonic maintenance fluids is common practice in hospitalized children. The objective of this study was to identify risk factors for the development of hospital-acquired, acute hyponatremia in a tertiary care hospital using a retrospective analysis. METHODS: All children who presented to the emergency department in a 3-month period and had at least 1 P(Na) measured (n = 1586) were evaluated. Those who were admitted were followed for the next 48 hours to identify patients with hospital-acquired hyponatremia. An age- and gender-matched case-control (1:3) analysis was performed with patients who did not become hyponatremic. RESULTS: Hyponatremia (P(Na) <136 mmol/L) was documented in 131 of 1586 patients with > or = 1 P(Na) measurements. Although 96 patients were hyponatremic on presentation, our study group consisted of 40 patients who developed hyponatremia in hospital. The case-control study showed that the patients in the hospital-acquired hyponatremia group received significantly more EFW and had a higher positive water balance. With respect to outcomes, 2 patients had major neurologic sequelae and 1 died. CONCLUSION: The most important factor for hospital-acquired hyponatremia is the administration of hypotonic fluid. We suggest that hypotonic fluid not be given to children when they have a P(Na) <138 mmol/L.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".