The International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) framework: the Kempen pilot
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
One of the most common treatments for dysphagia is the provision of texture-modified food and thickened liquids. To improve patient safety, a standardised terminology has been advocated. In 2015, the International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) framework was released. The IDDSI framework describes texture-modified food and thickened liquids for individuals of all ages, in all care settings and in all cultures. To put the IDDSI framework into operation, a pilot site in Kempen, Germany volunteered to conduct a quality assurance process to document IDDSI implementation. The process commenced on the neurology ward, with findings to inform roll-out to other wards and eventually other hospitals. Through wide stakeholder involvement using simultaneous top-down and bottom-up approaches and agreed timelines, the Kempen Pilot achieved implementation at ward level. Practical training, incorporating the IDDSI framework into a range of communication channels and inter-professional collaboration were key to successful implementation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it