Severe muscle depletion predicts postoperative length of stay but is not associated with survival after liver transplantation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We thank Drs. Clark and Cross for their interest in our study1 and will respond to their comments. We agree that one limitation of our study is that only patients who went on to receive liver transplantation were included, and patients who could have had sarcopenia might not have been listed. However, none of our patients evaluated for liver transplantation have been rejected solely on the basis of sarcopenia. The current evidence suggests that only “extreme sarcopenia,” previously defined differently as the lowest tertile of the total psoas area (TPA),2 the lowest quartile of the TPA,3 or the lowest sextile of the third lumbar skeletal muscle index,1 should be considered a contraindication for liver transplantation. On the other hand, in our cohort of patients, all underwent a nutritional evaluation as part of the liver transplant assessment with advice about increasing protein intake and leucine supplementation, but none of them had nasogastric or nasoenteral feeding. We normally used nasogastric or nasoenteral feeding only for those patients with a body mass index less than 18.5 kg/m2 because this has been shown to be a risk factor for mortality after liver transplantation,4 but none of the patients in this cohort had a body mass index below this threshold. Finally, because current methods used to assess liver disease severity, such as the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, do not give a functional assessment of the patient's fitness, we believe that the next step is to evaluate the development of composite scores, including new scores such as MELD-sarcopenia and MELD-psoas,5, 6 or to assign exemption points to those patients with sarcopenia so that they can undergo transplantation before they develop extreme sarcopenia. Nevertheless, this issue should be evaluated preferentially in prospective and multicenter controlled clinical trials.7 Aldo J. Montano-Loza, M.D., M.Sc., Ph.D. Division of Gastroenterology and Liver Unit University of Alberta Hospital Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it