Barriers to Oral Food Intake for Children Admitted to Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children are at risk for malnutrition in hospital, and a contributing factor may be poor oral intake. Barriers to intake have been studied in adults, but there is a lack of research in children. The purpose of this study was to identify the potential barriers to oral intake for children in hospital. Patients and families (n = 58) admitted to surgery and medicine units at the Stollery Children's Hospital completed a survey on barriers to oral food intake. Barriers were classified into 6 domains and major barriers were those identified by at least 30% of the population. On average each patient was affected by 22% of the barriers. Within each domain, the proportion of patients identifying at least 1 barrier was as follows: organization (74%), hunger (67%), quality (60%), effects of illness (53%), choice (38%), and physical limitations (29%). Having food brought in from home due to hunger, not wanting what was ordered once it arrives, food quality, decreased appetite, sickness, fatigue, and pain were identified as major barriers. Children have unique barriers to oral food intake in hospital which have not been previously identified. Food service models should consider these barriers to better meet the needs of this population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".