MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763778095 · doi:10.1177/0884533617735833

Use of Nasogastric Feeding Tubes for Children at Home: A Template for Caregiver Education

2017· article· en· W2763778095 on OpenAlex
Beth Lyman, Gina Rempel, Kerrin Windsor, Peggi Guenter

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition in Clinical Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineParent educationEnteral administrationNursingHealth professionalsParenteral nutritionHealth careIntensive care medicineDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a lack of knowledge on the part of caregivers who need to place nasogastric (NG) tubes in children for enteral nutrition therapy. This article provides the rationale, best practices, and a template for caregiver education. Canadian and Australian programs have excellent patient education materials. They have shared these step-by-step procedures for healthcare professionals to provide to caregivers to whom they are teaching placement and care of NG tubes.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.327 · 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