Unmet Needs in Nutritional Care in African Paediatric Oncology Units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of children diagnosed with cancer in low- and middle-income countries are malnourished, which likely affects survival. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: An online survey to paediatric oncology units (POUs) in Africa was done regarding nutritional assessment and care. RESULTS: Sixty-six surveys were received from POUs in 31 countries. Only 44.4% had a dedicated dietician for nutritional assessment and support; 29.6% undertook routine nutritional assessment during treatment. None reported defined criteria for nutritional intervention. Total parenteral nutrition was not available for 42.6% of POUs, while 51.8% did not have access to commercial enteral nutrition for inpatients, and 25.9% of the hospitals could not supply any home-based nutritional supplements. CONCLUSION: Nutritional assessment in POUs in Africa is neither routinely undertaken nor are there defined criteria to initiate nutritional interventions. Standardized guidelines for nutritional assessment and interventions are needed for African POUs to enable improved outcome.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".