MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2395358895 · doi:10.1111/vec.12449

Gastrointestinal dysmotility disorders in critically ill dogs and cats

2016· review· en· W2395358895 on OpenAlexaff
KimMi Whitehead, Yonaira Cortes, Laura Eirmann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsCargill (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCisaprideInternal medicineGastric emptyingGastroenterologyParenteral nutritionSmall intestinal bacterial overgrowthGastroparesisIntensive care medicineStomachIrritable bowel syndrome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To review the human and veterinary literature regarding gastrointestinal (GI) dysmotility disorders in respect to pathogenesis, patient risk factors, and treatment options in critically ill dogs and cats. ETIOLOGY: GI dysmotility is a common sequela of critical illness in people and small animals. The most common GI motility disorders in critically ill people and small animals include esophageal dysmotility, delayed gastric emptying, functional intestinal obstruction (ie, ileus), and colonic motility abnormalities. Medical conditions associated with the highest risk of GI dysmotility include mechanical ventilation, sepsis, shock, trauma, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and multiple organ failure. The incidence and pathophysiology of GI dysmotility in critically ill small animals is incompletely understood. DIAGNOSIS: A presumptive diagnosis of GI dysmotility is often made in high-risk patient populations following detection of persistent regurgitation, vomiting, lack of tolerance of enteral nutrition, abdominal pain, and constipation. Definitive diagnosis is established via radioscintigraphy; however, this diagnostic tool is not readily available and is difficult to perform on small animals. Other diagnostic modalities that have been evaluated include abdominal ultrasonography, radiographic contrast, and tracer studies. THERAPY: Therapy is centered at optimizing GI perfusion, enhancement of GI motility, and early enteral nutrition. Pharmacological interventions are instituted to promote gastric emptying and effective intestinal motility and prevention of complications. Promotility agents, including ranitidine/nizatidine, metoclopramide, erythromycin, and cisapride are the mainstays of therapy in small animals. PROGNOSIS: The development of complications related to GI dysmotility (eg, gastroesophageal reflux and aspiration) have been associated with increased mortality risk. Institution of prophylaxic therapy is recommended in high-risk patients, however, no consensus exists regarding optimal timing of initiating prophylaxic measures, preference of treatment, or duration of therapy. The prognosis for affected small animal patients remains unknown.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.349 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Emergency and Critical CareSame topicClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFrench-language works237,207