Adequacy of Protein and Energy Intake in Critically Ill Adults Following Liberation From Mechanical Ventilation Is Dependent on Route of Nutrition Delivery
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: Studies examining nutrition intake of critically ill patients following liberation from mechanical ventilation (LMV) are scarce. The objectives of this prospective, observational feasibility study were to quantify and assess protein and energy intake in hospitalized, critically ill patients following LMV, to determine barriers to optimal intake, and to report on the feasibility of recruiting and retaining patients into this study. METHODS: Adult patients requiring MV for >72 hours in a medical/surgical intensive care unit (ICU) were recruited. Protein and energy intakes were quantified up to 14 days following LMV. Patients also identified barriers to eating. RESULTS: Nineteen patients (mean age, 60 years [SD, 12 years]) were studied over 125 days. Over all study days, the median amounts of protein and energy consumed in comparison with amounts prescribed by dietitians were 46% (interquartile range [IQR], 26-100) and 71% (IQR, 38-100), respectively. When stratified by route of nutrition delivery, on days (n = 54) when patients consumed an oral diet as the sole nutrition source, median amounts of protein and energy consumed in comparison with those prescribed were only 27% (IQR, 15-41) and 47% (IQR, 29-66), respectively. The most frequently reported barriers to eating were poor appetite, early satiety, and taste changes. CONCLUSIONS: Protein and calorie intake is below prescribed amounts for patients whose enteral nutrition is discontinued and an oral diet prescribed as sole nutrition source following LMV. Acceptable strategies to enhance nutrition intake in post-ICU patients during the recovery stages of critical illness are needed.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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