Tolerance and Safety of Energy-Dense Enteral Formulae for Young Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The safety and tolerance of energy-dense enteral pediatric formulae were evaluated and compared with a standard formula. Children aged 1-6 years requiring tube feedings to provide ≥ 75% of their daily estimated energy needs for 21 days were evaluated in this phase III, randomized, open-label, multicenter study. Subjects received a control formula, Pediasure® (C; 1.0 kcal/mL) or an experimental formula similar in nutrient composition but higher in caloric density (1.5 kcal/mL) with or without fiber (EF and E, respectively). Subjects (n=94) returned for 3 weekly visits. Gastrointestinal parameters improved (p<0.05) in all groups. Energy intake was comparable among groups, but was achieved with lower (p<0.0001) volumes in E and EF relative to C. Weight gain was greater (p<0.01) in E versus C. Adverse event reporting was similar among groups. Energy dense formulae are an option for children with fluid restrictions or increased energy or fiber needs without compromising safety or tolerance.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".