MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381570726 · doi:10.51642/ppmj.v27i2.132

EFFECT OF HONEY ON THE BODY WEIGHT IN HEAD AND NECK CANCER PATIENTS AFTER RADIOTHERAPY

2016· article· en· W4381570726 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePakistan Postgraduate Medical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNuts composition and effects
Canadian institutionsCollège Montmorency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyBody weightHead and neck cancerWeight lossHead and neckSignificant differenceSurgeryInternal medicineObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Body weight loss is a negative consequence of radiotherapy in head and neck cancer. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy of honey on body weight of the patients.
 Materials and Methods: This interventional study was carried out in Radiation Oncology department of Mayo hospital, Lahore. This study involved 82 patients, divided into two groups by random sampling, who received 60-70 Grays of radiation in 22-30 fractions with curative intent. In treatment group, patients were instructed to take 20 mL of honey. In control group, they were advised to rinse with 0.9% of saline. The weight loss during radiotherapy was calculated as the difference between the weight at the start and the end of radiotherapy. The statistical analysis was done by t-test. Results: In honey-treated group, patients showed static and positive change in body weight when compared to control group and it is statistically significant.
 Conclusion: This study showed that oral intake of honey during radiotherapy is valuable for maintaining body weight during and after radiotherapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.291 · 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