Energy and protein requirements for children with CKD stages 2-5 and on dialysis–clinical practice recommendations from the Pediatric Renal Nutrition Taskforce
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
Dietary management in pediatric chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an area fraught with uncertainties and wide variations in practice. Even in tertiary pediatric nephrology centers, expert dietetic input is often lacking. The Pediatric Renal Nutrition Taskforce (PRNT), an international team of pediatric renal dietitians and pediatric nephrologists, was established to develop clinical practice recommendations (CPRs) to address these challenges and to serve as a resource for nutritional care. We present CPRs for energy and protein requirements for children with CKD stages 2-5 and those on dialysis (CKD2-5D). We address energy requirements in the context of poor growth, obesity, and different levels of physical activity, together with the additional protein needs to compensate for dialysate losses. We describe how to achieve the dietary prescription for energy and protein using breastmilk, formulas, food, and dietary supplements, which can be incorporated into everyday practice. Statements with a low grade of evidence, or based on opinion, must be considered and adapted for the individual patient by the treating physician and dietitian according to their clinical judgment. Research recommendations have been suggested. The CPRs will be regularly audited and updated by the PRNT.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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