MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112190379 · doi:10.1007/s00467-020-04852-5

Assessment of nutritional status in children with kidney diseases—clinical practice recommendations from the Pediatric Renal Nutrition Taskforce

2020· review· en· W3112190379 on OpenAlexafffund
Christina L. Nelms, Vanessa Shaw, Larry A. Greenbaum, Caroline Anderson, An Desloovere, Dieter Haffner, Michiel J.S. Oosterveld, Fabio Paglialonga, Nonnie Polderman, Leila Qizalbash, Lesley Rees, José Renken‐Terhaerdt, Jetta Tuokkola, Johan Vande Walle, Rukshana Shroff, Bradley A. Warady

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Nephrology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
FundersKidney Research UKNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversity College LondonVitafloMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineGrading (engineering)AnthropometryClinical PracticeClinical nutritionAuditFamily medicineIntensive care medicinePediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In children with kidney diseases, an assessment of the child's growth and nutritional status is important to guide the dietary prescription. No single metric can comprehensively describe the nutrition status; therefore, a series of indices and tools are required for evaluation. The Pediatric Renal Nutrition Taskforce (PRNT) is an international team of pediatric renal dietitians and pediatric nephrologists who develop clinical practice recommendations (CPRs) for the nutritional management of children with kidney diseases. Herein, we present CPRs for nutritional assessment, including measurement of anthropometric and biochemical parameters and evaluation of dietary intake. The statements have been graded using the American Academy of Pediatrics grading matrix. Statements with a low grade or those that are opinion-based must be carefully considered and adapted to individual patient needs based on the clinical judgment of the treating physician and dietitian. Audit and research recommendations are provided. The CPRs will be periodically 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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations67
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric NephrologySame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207