Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Gastric cancer is one of the most frequent causes of death secondary to cancer in the world. Surgery is the only potentially curative treatment but its clinical consequences are significant. The objective of this study is to evaluate the nutritional state of patients with a total gastrectomy secondary to gastric adenocarcinoma. Methods: We designed a descriptive study with a transversal cut in our institution. We included 22 patients which had a minimum evolution time of six months after total gastrectomy secondary to gastric cancer surgery was performed. Neither of them had metastasis. The nutritional analysis included only biochemical data. Descriptive statistics were used for statistical analysis. Results: Eight females and 14 males were included in the study. Median age was 57 years (34 - 69 years). The 74% of the patients were underweight and none of them was overweight. The average body mass index (BMI) was 16.88 kg/m 2 . Eleven patients suffered from mild anemia (10.5 - 12 g/dl) and 5 from moderate anemia (9 - 10.5 g/dl). Only two patients presented severe anemia (less than 9 g/dl). The 58% presented hypoproteinaemia and hypoalbuminaemia. The main post-surgery complication was nausea (46%). Seventy-eight percent of the patients had loss of appetite. Twenty-one patients were able to walk without help and leave their homes. Conclusions: The incidence of anemia in these patients was very high. In most of the patients, albumin and proteins levels were affected too. So malnutrition was a relevant consequence of a total gastrectomy. World J Oncol. 2010;1(2):87-90 doi: https://doi.org/10.4021/wjon2010.04.196w
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".