Improved long‐term outcome of children with congenital diarrhea followed by an intestinal rehabilitation program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Long-term outcomes of congenital diarrheas and enteropathies (CODE) are poorly described. We evaluated the morbidity and mortality of children with CODE followed by an intestinal rehabilitation program (IRP) compared to children with short bowel syndrome (SBS). METHODS: Matched case-control study of children with intestinal failure (IF) due to CODE (diagnosed between 2006 and 2020; N = 15) and SBS (N = 42), matched 1:3, based on age at diagnosis and duration of parenteral nutrition (PN). Nutritional status, growth, and IF-related complications were compared. Survival and enteral autonomy were compared to a nonmatched SBS cohort (N = 177). RESULTS: Fifteen CODE patients (five males, median age 3.2 years) were followed for a median of 2.9 years. Eleven children were alive at the end of the follow-up, and two achieved enteral autonomy. The CODE group had higher median PN fluid and calorie requirements than their matched SBS controls at the end of the follow-up (83 vs. 45 mL/kg/day, p = 0.01; 54 vs. 30.5 kcal/kg/day, p < 0.01), but had similar rates of growth parameters, intestinal failure associated liver disease, central venous catheter complications and nephrocalcinosis. Kaplan-Meier analyses of 10-year survival and enteral autonomy were significantly lower in CODE patients compared to the nonmatched SBS population (60% vs. 89% and 30% vs. 87%, respectively; log-rank p < 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher PN needs in CODE, rates of IF complications were similar to matched children with SBS. Enteral autonomy and survival rates were lower in CODE patients. Treatment by IRP can mitigate IF-related complications and improve CODE patient's outcome.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".