MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PP473 Topic: AS18–Nutrition Support/Fluids: DOES VOLUME-BASED ENTERAL FEEDING IMPROVE NUTRIENT DELIVERY IN HOSPITALIZED CRITICALLY ILL CHILDREN? PROTOCOL FOR A RANDOMIZED FEASIBILITY TRIAL OF VOLUME VERSUS RATE-BASED ENTERAL NUTRITION

2024· article· en· W4404041486 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole Gilbert, L.A. Lee, Dana Boctor, Tanis R. Fenton

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Critical Care Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthAlberta Children's HospitalAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCritically illParenteral nutritionIntensive care medicineEnteral administrationProtocol (science)Randomized controlled trialSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims & Objectives: Early optimal enteral nutrition (EN) is associated with better clinical outcomes, including mortality, in critically ill children. Frequent feed interruptions are common resulting in underfeeding and nutrient deficits. Traditionally tube feedings are provided using hourly rate-based feeding, which directs the nurse to run feeds at the prescribed hourly rate. Volume-based feeding allows bedside nurses to adjust feed rates to compensate for disruptions. Funding: ASPEN Rhodes Research Foundation Objectives: Determine the feasibility of a randomized control trial (RCT) to evaluate Volume-based EN by: Determine RCT participant enrollment and recruitment rates. Measure adherence to the study protocol. Determine the consent rate under a deferred consent strategy. Describe caregiver and patient perceptions and experiences around deferred consent. Methods: We will conduct a single-center parallel partially blinded 1:1 randomized feasibility trial of 56 children admitted to the ACH PICU comparing Volume-based EN (intervention) versus Rate-based EN (control). Children 1-month to 18 years of age, anticipated PICU admissions ≥ 48 hours and to be initiated on EN support will be eligible. Volume-based EN: Bedside nurses receive a daily feed volume to administer over a 24-hour period. After feeds are held, rates will be adjusted to meet this goal. Rate-based EN (usual care): Bedside nurses receive an hourly feed rate to administer over a 24-hour period. Nurses will not adjust feeds to compensate for interruptions. Results: Recruitment anticipated to commence in March 2024. Conclusions: This feasibility trial will inform a full-scale RCT assessing the impact of volume-based EN on nutritional intakes and hospital outcomes for critically ill children. Keywords: Nutrition, Randomized Controlled Trial, RCT

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1040.017

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Critical Care MedicineSame topicClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFrench-language works237,207