Early Nutritional Intervention to Promote Healthy Eating Habits in Pediatric Oncology: A Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to describe the feasibility of a nutritional intervention that promotes healthy eating habits early after cancer pediatric diagnosis in patients and their parents. Participants were recruited 4 to 12 weeks after cancer diagnosis as part of the VIE study. The one-year nutritional intervention included an initial evaluation and 6 follow-up visits every 2 months with a registered dietician. The feasibility assessment included rates of retention, participation, attendance, completion of study measures, and participants’ engagement. A preliminary evaluation of the intervention's impact on the participants’ dietary intakes was conducted. A total of 62 participants were included in the study (51.6% male, mean age = 8.5 years, mean time since diagnosis = 13.2 weeks). The retention and attendance rates were 72.6% and 71.3%, respectively. Attendance to follow-up visits declined over time, from 83.9% to 48.9%. A majority of participants had high participation (50.8%) and high engagement (56.4%). Measures of body-mass-index or weight-for-length ratio and dietary 24-h recalls were the procedures with the highest completion rates. Participants with refractory disease or relapse were less likely to complete the intervention. Post-intervention, participants (n = 21) had a lower sodium intake compared to the initial evaluation. These results suggest that a nutritional intervention that involves patients and parents early after a pediatric cancer diagnosis is feasible.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".