Preoperative fasting in children. The evolution of recommendations and guidelines, and the underlying evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review discusses the evolution of preoperative fasting guidelines and examines the incidence of pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents and suggested treatments. Nine guidelines developed by professional societies and published in peer-reviewed journals since 1994 were identified. The recommendations on preoperative fasting for various categories have undergone only small adaptations in the following three decades in pediatric anesthesia. We found twelve published studies of the incidence of pulmonary aspiration, which ranges from 0.6 to 12 in 10,000 anesthetics in children. However, this variation reflects differences in the definition of aspiration as well as differences in study design. The main risk factors identified are emergency surgery, ASA physical status, and patient age. Several additional risk factors have been suggested, including non-compliance to fasting guidelines. The duration of clear fluid fasting is not associated with an increased risk of pulmonary aspiration which may be reflected in future guideline updates in pediatric anesthesia.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.102 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".