Change of Outcomes in Pediatric Intestinal Failure: Use of Time-Series Analysis to Assess the Evolution of an Intestinal Rehabilitation Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical picture of pediatric intestinal failure has changed over the past 15 years, while effectiveness evolving treatment options remains unclear. This study explored evolution in care and quantified independent effects of new treatment options. STUDY DESIGN: Consecutive patients (n = 196) with neonatal or infantile intestinal failure, born between July 1996 and December 2011, were derived from an intestinal rehabilitation program (IRP) patient registry. Change over time was analyzed using multivariable Box-Jenkins method-based autoregressive integrative moving average models (ARIMA), robust linear regression, and nonparametric trend analysis. Four systematically introduced treatment options (IRP, serial transverse enteroplasty, omega-3 lipid emulsions, and ethanol locks) were evaluated. Analyses were adjusted for patient characteristics and disease severity. The primary outcome was disease-specific mortality from liver failure and sepsis. Secondary outcomes included parenteral nutrition weaning, transplantations, catheter complications, and liver disease. RESULTS: Patient characteristics remained unchanged over time, except for decreasing small bowel length (-0.5%/quarter; 95% CI -0.85, -0.16) and ICU admission time (-0.6 days/quarter; 95% CI -1.03, -0.18). Disease-specific mortality diminished significantly over time (-0.02 deaths/quarter; 95% CI -0.03, -0.01) by IRP and omega-3 lipids introduction (-0.6 deaths/quarter each, 95% CI -1.23, -0.02 and -0.77, -0.45, respectively). Serial transverse enteroplasty and ethanol locks had no significant impact. Parenteral nutrition weaning and transplantations remained unchanged, while catheter sepsis and complication rates decreased by 0.3 episodes/1,000 catheter-days each (95% CI -0.43, -0.2 and -0.45, -0.24, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of IRP and omega-3 lipids independently decreased disease-specific mortality. For the first time, time series analysis was applied to evaluate effectiveness of treatment options in intestinal rehabilitation.
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 | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".