MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471193445 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2016.28

Nutrition with Gastrostomy Feeding Tubes for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis in Canada

2016· article· en· W2471193445 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Timothy Benstead, Caitlin S. Jackson-Tarlton, Desmond Leddin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPercutaneous endoscopic gastrostomyAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisSwallowingDysphagiaMedicineGastrostomyWeight lossWeaknessPopulationFeeding tubeParenteral nutritionMotor neurone diseasePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyIntensive care medicinePediatricsDiseaseSurgeryPEG ratioInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a rapidly progressing degenerative motor neuron disease that results in significant muscle weakness. Defects in energy metabolism and difficulties in swallowing eventually lead to a reduction in body mass. Weight loss exacerbates symptoms and serves as an independent negative prognostic factor. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is often inserted in patients with ALS to either supplement or replace oral feeding. However, the criteria for PEG placement and timing of insertion are important clinical decisions that have not been fully studied. Given the absence of guiding evidence, the aim of this project was to better understand how Canadian ALS clinics make decisions regarding gastrostomy feeding. METHODS: ALS clinical directors across Canada were asked if they had written guidelines for timing of PEG insertion and if not, what criteria they use to make this decision. Responses from 10 of 17 centres contacted were received. RESULTS: The approach to supplemental nutrition management in Canadian clinics varies in the absence of formal guidelines. Only one centre has a written set of centre-specific protocols in place. Most clinics considered some combination of respiratory decline, weight loss, dysphagia and/or patient readiness when reaching a decision. However, the absolute threshold and mechanism of measuring the individual criteria differed between clinics. CONCLUSIONS: Practices generally reflect international published recommendations but vary on the emphasis of specific criteria. Further research is required to determine the optimal timing and criteria to place gastrostomy feeding tubes in the ALS population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ResearchFrench-language works237,207