American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This 2014 revision of the Standards of Practice (SOP) and Standards of Professional Performance (SOPP) for Registered Dietitians Nutritionists (RDNs) in Nutrition Support represents an update of the 2007 Standards composed by content experts of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. The revision is based upon the Revised 2012 SOP in Nutrition Care and SOPP for RDs, which incorporates the Nutrition Care Process and the six domains of professionalism: Quality in Practice, Competence and Accountability, Provision of Services, Application of Research, Communication and Application of Knowledge, and Utilization and Management of Resources. These SOP and SOPP are designed to promote the provision of safe, effective, and efficient nutrition support services, facilitate evidence-based practice, and serve as a professional evaluation resource for RDNs who specialize or wish to specialize in nutrition support therapy. These standards should be applied in all patient/client care settings in which RDNs in nutrition support provide care. These settings include, but are not limited to, acute care, ambulatory/outpatient care, and home and alternate site care. The standards highlight the value of the nutrition support RDN's roles in quality management, regulatory compliance, research, teaching, consulting, and writing for peer-reviewed professional publications. The standards assist the RDN in nutrition support to distinguish his or her level of practice (competent, proficient, or expert) and would guide the RDN in creating a personal development plan to achieve increasing levels of knowledge, skill, and ability in nutrition support practice.
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 | 0.011 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.022 |
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".