MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200540570 · doi:10.1016/j.clnesp.2021.12.026

Associations between pretreatment nutritional assessments and treatment complications in patients with stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review

2021· review· en· W4200540570 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Melissa J. J. Voorn, K. Beukers, C.M.M. Trepels, Gerben Bootsma, Bart C. Bongers, Maryska L.G. Janssen‐Heijnen

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Nutrition ESPEN · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineLung cancerBody mass indexnon-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)MalnutritionCINAHLSarcopeniaPsychological interventionIntensive care medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are often nutritionally depleted and therefore at high-risk for treatment complications. Identifying these patients before the start of treatment is important to initiate preventive interventions for better treatment outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate which outcome variables of pretreatment nutritional assessments are associated with posttreatment complications in patients with stage I-III NSCLC, as well as to identify cut-off values for clinical risk stratification. METHODS: In this systematic review, PubMed, Embase, and Cinahl databases were searched for eligible studies published up to March 2021. Studies describing the association between pretreatment nutritional assessment and treatment complications in patients with NSCLC were included. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies were included, which merely focused on surgical treatment for NSCLC. Methodological quality was poor in thirteen studies (57%). Poor outcomes of body mass index, sarcopenia, serum albumin, controlling nutritional status, prognostic nutrition index, nutrition risk score, and (geriatric) nutrition risk index were associated with a higher risk for treatment complications. Cut-off values for pretreatment nutritional assessment were reported in a limited number of studies and were inconsistent. CONCLUSION: Poor outcomes of pretreatment nutritional assessments are associated with a higher risk for posttreatment complications. Further research is needed on the ability of easy-to-use pretreatment nutritional assessments to accurately identify patients who are at high risk for treatment complications, as high-risk patients may benefit from pretreatment interventions to improve their nutritional status.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.009
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Nutrition ESPENSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207