Is the risk of refeeding syndrome a problem in reaching nutritional requirements? A cohort of patients on enteral nutrition support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Background: refeeding syndrome (RS) is a metabolic complication associated with nutritional support. The lack of management protocols for patients on nutritional support may lead to the development of RS or undernourishment. Objective: to evaluate adherence to the algorithm for total enteral nutritional support (ASNET), and the efficacy of reaching nutrient requirements in patients at risk of RS. Methods: a cohort study: screening and nutritional evaluation of patients and risk of RS were performed. Adults admitted to hospital for noncritical illness who received exclusively enteral nutrition (EN) were eligible. Patients with RS, intestinal failure or chronic diarrhea were excluded. Adherence to ASNET was evaluated along with the efficacy of nutritional support to reach the optimal protein and energy requirement (OPER) and any associated complications. Patient follow-up ended when the feeding route was changed or upon discharge. Results: a total of 73 patients were included (mean age, 62 ± 16 yrs; BMI, 18.5 ± 4.2 kg/m2), and 55 % were men. All had nutritional risk of developing RS (57, low; 15, high; 1, very high); 34 % had adequate adherence to ASNET, and 33 % managed to cover the total requirement between 4 and 6 days. OPER was reached by 38 % by the fourth day of EN, and adequate adherence to ASNET increased the probability of achieving it (RR, 2.2; 95 % CI, 1.6-3.2, p < 0.0001) without increasing the associated complications. Nonetheless, 36 % developed complications, of whom 96 % did not adhere to ASNET. Conclusion: adherence to ASNET in patients at risk of RS allowed the achievement of OPER safely by day four with fewer associated complications.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".