MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3115889095 · doi:10.7429/pi.2020.733196

Assessment of nutritional risk in persons with mental health disorders admitted to the acute psychiatric inpatient unit: an Italian study.

2021· article· en· W3115889095 on OpenAlexaff
Jacopo Albieri, Paolo Ferrara, Stefano Terzoni, Stefano Salcuni, Anne Destrebecq, Orsola Gambini

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalnutritionMedicineContext (archaeology)PsychiatryMental healthPopulationPediatricsGerontologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mental disorders can impact on several aspects of the person and therefore also on nutritional models; the literature shows that psychiatric persons are at risk of malnutrition, but the available studies are limited, particularly in Italy. AIMS: To investigate the prevalence of malnutrition by defect and metabolic syndrome in inpatients in an acute Psychiatric unit. To evaluate the characteristics and food habits of the sample. METHODS: Assessment of the risk of malnutrition (Mini Nutritional Assessment Scale) and Metabolic Syndrome (APTIII criteria) by administering a new scale to all persons aged 18+ at admission in two inpatient units of a major teaching hospital in Milan, Italy. FINDINGS: One Hundred one people were enrolled; 29.70% were malnourished or at risk of malnutrition by defect; Major Depressive Disorder, serum levels of albumin below range and low levels of appetite were significantly associated with malnutrition. 11.88% was suffering from Metabolic Syndrome, which was significantly associated with Psychotic Disorder, high levels of appetite and junk food consumption. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlighted the relevance of malnutrition in the psychiatric population and suggest the need for a systematic evaluation, in every clinical context as well as the key role of nurses.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→