Nutrition in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease
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
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A growing body of evidence supports the need for detailed attention to nutrition and diet in children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We aimed to define the steps in instituting dietary or nutritional management in light of the current evidence and to offer a useful and practical guide to physicians and dieticians involved in the care of pediatric IBD patients. METHODS: A group of 20 experts in pediatric IBD participated in an iterative consensus process including 2 face-to-face meetings, following an open call to Nutrition Committee of the European Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Porto, IBD Interest, and Nutrition Committee. A list of 41 predefined questions was addressed by working subgroups based on a systematic review of the literature. RESULTS: A total of 53 formal recommendations and 47 practice points were endorsed with a consensus rate of at least 80% on the following topics: nutritional assessment; macronutrients needs; trace elements, minerals, and vitamins; nutrition as a primary therapy of pediatric IBD; probiotics and prebiotics; specific dietary restrictions; and dietary compounds and the risk of IBD. CONCLUSIONS: This position paper represents a useful guide to help the clinicians in the management of nutrition issues in children with IBD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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