Development of a core outcome set for pediatric chronic intestinal failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In research on pediatric chronic intestinal failure, heterogeneity in reported definitions and outcomes exists. This leads to a risk of reporting bias and impossibility of evidence synthesis. Also, reported outcomes should be relevant to both healthcare providers and patients and their parents. Therefore, the aim of this study is to create a core outcome set (COS) to be used in studies on pediatric chronic intestinal failure. METHODS: Candidate outcomes were selected from a recent systematic review. A three-round Delphi study among key stakeholders and a consensus meeting with an expert panel were undertaken to achieve consensus on the COS. RESULTS: Seventy-two stakeholders (79%) completed all three rounds of the Delphi process. Ninety-eight outcomes were assessed, and five new outcomes were added after the first round. Ten outcomes were included in the final COS: weaning from parenteral nutrition, growth, mortality, central line-related infection, central line longevity, sepsis not related to central line infection, central line-related thrombosis, intestinal failure-associated liver disease, (serious) adverse events, and health-related quality of life. CONCLUSION: This pediatric chronic intestinal failure COS consists of 10 outcomes important for all key stakeholders. Usage of this set in future research should minimize outcome heterogeneity and enhance the value of evidence synthesis. This will lead to better management in this field of rare gastrointestinal conditions.
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 | 0.157 | 0.238 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".