Preoperative malnutrition in patients with colorectal cancer
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
Preoperative malnutrition in patients with colorectal cancer is associated with several postoperative consequences and poorer prognosis. Currently, there is a lack of a universal screening tool to assess nutritional status, and intervention to treat preoperative malnutrition is often neglected. This review summarizes and compares preoperative screening and interventional tools to help providers optimize malnourished patients with colorectal cancer for surgery. We found that nutritional screenings, such as the Subjectibe Global Assessment, Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment, Prognostic Nutritional Index, Nutrition Risk Index, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutrition Risk Screening 2002, Nutrition Risk Score, serum albumin, and prealbumin, have all effectively predicted postoperative outcome. Physicians should consider which of these tools best fits their needs based on the their mode of assessment, efficiency, and specified parameters. Additionally, preoperative nutritional support, such as trimodal prehabilitation, modified peripheral parenteral nutrition, and N-3 fatty acid and arginine supplementation, which have also benefited patients postoperatively, ought to be implemented appropriately according to their ease of execution. Given the high prevalence of preoperative malnutrition in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer, it is essential that health care providers assess and treat this malnutrition to reduce postoperative complications and length of hospital stay, and to improve prognosis to augment a patient's quality of care.La malnutrition préopératoire chez les patients atteints d'un cancer colorectal est associée à plusieurs complications postopératoires et à un pronostic plus sombre. Il n'existe actuellement aucun outil universel d'évaluation du statut nutritionnel, et les mesures visant à corriger la malnutrition préopératoire font souvent défaut. La présente revue résume et compare les outils de dépistage et d'intervention préopératoires pour aider les professionnels à améliorer l'état des patients dénutris qui doivent subir une chirurgie pour le cancer colorectal. Nous avons constaté que le dépistage nutritionnel à l'aide de questionnaires tels que l'Évaluation globale subjective, l'Index nutritionnel pronostique, l'Outil universel de dépistage de la malnutrition, NRS 2002 (Nutrition Risk Screening 2002), l'évaluation du risque nutritionnel, et le dosage de l'albumine et de la préalbumine sériques, a permis de prédire avec justesse l'issue de la chirurgie. Les médecins devraient vérifier lequel de ces outils est le mieux adapté à leurs besoins selon leur modalité d'évaluation, leur efficience et autres paramètres spécifiques. Également, un soutien nutritionnel préopératoire, comme la préadaptation trimodale, la nutrition parentérale périphérique modifiée et les suppléments d'acides gras N-3 et d'arginine, qui ont aussi donné des résultats postopératoires favorables, devrait être appliqué selon sa facilité d'administration. Étant donné la forte prévalence de la malnutrition préopératoire chez les patients soumis à une chirurgie pour cancer colorectal, les professionnels de la santé se doivent d'évaluer et de corriger la malnutrition afin de prévenir les complications postopératoires, d'abréger la durée du séjour hospitalier, et d'améliorer ainsi le pronostic et la qualité des soins.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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