MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801331776 · doi:10.1097/ncq.0000000000000338

Frequency of and Reasons for False-Positive Consults Generated by the Malnutrition Screening Tool

2018· article· en· W2801331776 on OpenAlexaff
Alison Sturgill, Kathy K. Stanczyk, Lori Crouch, Karen Byrd

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Care Quality · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsSturgeon Community Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalnutritionMedicineNursing staffNursing homesNursingFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Nutrition screening on admission is one way to identify patients with malnutrition. The Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) is a commonly used screening tool but has been found to generate false-positive consults. PURPOSE: The purpose of this research was two-fold: (1) to determine the percentage of nursing screens, using the MST, that generated a false-positive consult for a registered dietitian, and (2) to identify the reasons for these false-positive consults. METHODS: During a 3-month period, registered dietitians documented the number of false-positive consults received from the MST and reasons they were received. RESULTS: Of the registered dietitian consults generated, 5.5% were deemed false-positive. The most common reason for a false-positive consult was patient-reported weight loss that had resolved. CONCLUSIONS: As nurses are integral to completion of the MST, data generated can be used in ongoing education of nursing staff.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.328 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Care QualitySame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207