MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134580910 · doi:10.7573/dic.2020-11-2

Paediatrics: how to manage functional constipation

2021· review· en· W3134580910 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDrugs in Context · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFunctional constipationRectal examinationConstipationPhysical examinationIntensive care medicinePopulationEnemaSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite being a common problem in childhood, functional constipation is often difficult to manage. This article provides a narrative updated review on the evaluation, diagnosis and management of childhood functional constipation. METHODS: A PubMed search was performed with Clinical Queries using the key term 'functional constipation'. The search strategy included clinical trials, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, observational studies and reviews. The search was restricted to the English literature and to the paediatric population. The information retrieved from the above search was used in the compilation of the present article. RESULTS: A detailed history and thorough physical examination are important in the evaluation of a child with constipation to establish the diagnosis of functional constipation as per the Rome IV criteria and to catch 'red flags' suggestive of organic causes of constipation. These 'red flags' include delayed passage of meconium, ribbon stool, rectal bleeding/blood in the stool unless attributable to an anal fissure, failure to thrive, severe abdominal distension, absent anal wink/cremasteric reflex, tight and empty rectum on digital examination and explosive expulsion of liquid stool and gas on withdrawal of the finger, hair tuft/dimple/lipoma/haemangioma in the lumbosacral area, and an anteriorly displaced anus. For functional constipation, pharmacological therapy consists of faecal disimpaction and maintenance therapy. This can be effectively accomplished with oral medications, rectal medications or a combination of both. The most commonly used and most effective laxative is polyethylene glycol. Non-pharmacological management consists of education, behavioural modification and dietary interventions. The combination of pharmacological therapy and non-pharmacological management increases the chance of success. CONCLUSION: Polyethylene glycol is the medication of first choice for both disimpaction and maintenance therapy. If polyethylene glycol is not available or is poorly tolerated, lactulose is the preferred alternative. Other laxatives may be considered as second-line therapy if treatment with osmotic laxatives fails or is insufficient. Maintenance treatment should be continued for at least 2 months. Early treatment will result in a faster and shorter treatment course.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.260 · 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