Children's Oncology Group (COG) Nutrition Committee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Children's Oncology Group (COG) Nutrition Committee was established to further the knowledge of nutrition in children with cancer by education and the conduct of clinical trials. A survey of COG institutions revealed lack of conformity in evaluation and categorization of nutritional status, and criteria for nutritional intervention. The Committee subsequently established specific categories of malnutrition (Underweight and Overweight) based on ideal body weight or body mass index. An algorithm was developed as a guideline for nutritional intervention as well as references and resources for determining estimated needs. The Committee embarked on concepts for clinical trials of nutritional interventions. The first pilot study, evaluating the feasibility of using an immunoneutraceutical precursor for glutathione production, has been completed. This study showed weight gain and improvement in glutathione status. A pilot trial of proactive enteral feeding for patients at high risk of malnutrition has commenced. The Committee believes that nutrition is relevant to all aspects of cancer control. The paucity of nutritional investigation in children with cancer needs to be rectified.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".