Nutritional Therapy Strategies in Pediatric Crohn’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increase in incidences of pediatric Crohn's Disease (CD) worldwide has been strongly linked with dietary shifts towards a Westernized diet, ultimately leading to altered gut microbiota and disturbance in intestinal immunity and the metabolome. Multiple clinical studies in children with CD have demonstrated the high efficacy of nutritional therapy with exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) to induce remission with an excellent safety profile. However, EEN is poorly tolerated, limiting its compliance and clinical application. This has spiked an interest in the development of alternative and better-tolerated nutritional therapy strategies. Several nutritional therapies have now been designed not only to treat the nutritional deficiencies seen in children with active CD but also to correct dysbiosis and reduce intestinal inflammation. In this review, we report the most recent insights regarding nutritional strategies in children with active CD: EEN, partial enteral nutrition (PEN), Crohn's disease exclusive diet (CDED), and CD treatment-with-eating diet (CD-TREAT). We describe their setup, efficacy, safety, and (dis)advantages as well as some of their potential mechanisms of action and perspectives. A better understanding of different nutritional therapeutic options and their mechanisms will yield better and safer management strategies for children with CD and may address the barriers and limitations of current strategies in children.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".