The “FEEDS (FEeding Eating Deglutition Skills)” over Time Study in Cardiofaciocutaneous Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feeding, eating and deglutition difficulties are key concerns in patients with cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome (CFCS). This study intends to quantify the development of feeding skills from birth to adulthood in patients with CFCS. Twenty-seven patients (eight males; mean age: 16.7 ± 8.3 years; median age: 15 years, age range: 1.5–38 years) with molecularly confirmed clinical diagnosis of CFCS were prospectively recruited from the Rare Disease Unit, Paediatrics Department, Fondazione Policlinico Agostino Gemelli-IRCCS, Rome, Italy, over a one-year period. Pathogenic variants along with key information regarding oro-motor features were collected. Sialorrhea was quantified using the Drooling Quotient 5. Feeding abilities were screened using the Italian version of the Montreal Children’s Hospital Feeding Scale (I-MCH-FS). The oral sensory processing section of the Sensory Profile completed the assessment. Mild-to-profuse drooling was experienced by 25% of patients, and food taste selectivity was a constant during infancy (65%), with persistence even beyond adolescence. Nineteen percent of participants with long-term enteral feeding dependency had BRAF, KRAS and MAP2K1 mutations. These findings document that mealtime challenges in CFCS do not remain restricted only to the paediatric age, and that supportive care until adulthood plays a key role.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".