MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022135256 · doi:10.12998/wjcc.v8.i9.1561

Nutrition management in acute pancreatitis: Clinical practice consideration

2020· review· en· W3022135256 on OpenAlexaff
Narisorn Lakananurak, Leah Gramlich

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Clinical Cases · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineParenteral nutritionMalnutritionAcute pancreatitisIntensive care medicinePancreatitisPsychological interventionDiseaseClinical nutritionGlutamineGastrointestinal diseaseMedical nutrition therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common gastrointestinal disease and the leading cause of hospital admission and healthcare burden among gastrointestinal disorders in many countries. Patients can present with varying degrees of inflammation and disease severity, ranging from self-limiting mild AP to devastating and fatal severe AP. Many factors contribute to malnutrition in AP, especially abnormal metabolism and catabolism related to inflammation. The concept of "pancreatic rest" is not evidence-based. There is however, emerging evidence that supports the use of oral or enteral nutrition to improve nutrition status and to reduce local and systemic inflammation, complications, and death. In mild disease, patients are generally able to initiate solid oral diet and do not require specialized nutrition care such as enteral or parenteral nutrition. In contrast, nutrition interventions are imperative in moderately severe and severe AP. The current article aims to review the latest evidence and suggest practical nutrition interventions in patients with AP, including nutrition requirements, routes of nutrition treatment, types of formula, and the role of nutritional supplements, such as glutamine, probiotics, omega-3 fatty acids, and antioxidants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations77
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Clinical CasesSame topicPancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207