MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799903151 · doi:10.1177/2150135118765881

Nutrition Considerations in the Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patient

2018· review· en· W2799903151 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsey Justice, Jason R. Buckley, Alejandro A. Floh, Megan Horsley, Jeffrey A. Alten, Vijay Anand, Steven M. Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaSickKids FoundationStollery Children's HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineParenteral nutritionIntensive care medicineCritically illIntensive careClinical nutritionPediatric intensive care unitIntensive care unitCaloric intakePediatricsBody weightInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adequate caloric intake plays a vital role in the course of illness and the recovery of critically ill patients. Nutritional status and nutrient delivery during critical illness have been linked to clinical outcomes such as mortality, incidence of infection, and length of stay. However, feeding practices with critically ill pediatric patients after cardiac surgery are variable. The Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Society sought to provide an expert review on provision of nutrition to pediatric cardiac intensive care patients, including caloric requirements, practical considerations for providing nutrition, safety of enteral nutrition in controversial populations, feeding considerations with chylothorax, and the benefits of feeding beyond nutrition. This article addresses these areas of concern and controversy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations28
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal for Pediatric and Congenital Heart SurgerySame topicClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFrench-language works237,207