Diets for patients undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplant—a review
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
At present there is no known consensus or standard of practice when recommending diet modifications for patients undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). There is large variation between centres in terms of which patients are required to follow a restricted diet, what foods are or are not permitted, and how long patients should follow a modified or restricted diet. Some centres continue to recommend outdated highly restrictive “neutropenic” or “low bacteria” (ND/LBD) diets despite a lack of evidence indicating benefit. Many centres are now moving towards more liberalized diets based on a “food safety” approach which follows guidelines from food and health agencies such as the FDA, CDC, and Health Canada, as well as research that shows that these diets are equally safe and potentially more beneficial than ND/LBD in terms of acceptance, satisfaction, and adherence. This article reviews and discusses the current body of literature relating to diet post-HSCT. Statement of novelty: An up-to-date review of diets recommended post-HSCT and a rationale for moving towards a food-safety based approach over neutropenic or low bacteria diets, which continue to be widely followed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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