MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405383875 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxae037

A guide to the community management of paediatric eating disorders

2024· review· en· W4405383875 on OpenAlexaff
Marian Coret, Ellie Vyver, Megan Harrison, Alène Toulany, Ashley Vandermorris, Holly Agostino

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsCanadian Paediatric Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialMedicineEating disordersPopulationModalitiesPsychiatryFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eating disorders (EDs) are a group of serious, potentially life-threatening illnesses that typically have their onset during adolescence and can be associated with severe medical and psychosocial complications. The impact of EDs on caregivers and other family members can also be significant. Health care providers (HCPs) play an important role in the screening and management of adolescents and young adults with EDs. This position statement assists community-based HCPs with recognizing, diagnosing, and treating EDs in the paediatric population. Screening modalities, indications for hospitalization, medical complications, and monitoring of young people with EDs are summarized. Current evidence supports the use of family-based treatment (FBT) as the first-line psychological therapeutic modality for adolescents with restrictive EDs. While the provision of FBT may be beyond the scope of practice for some community physicians, this statement reviews its core tenets. When an ED is diagnosed, early application of these principles in the community setting by HCPs may slow disease progression and provide guidance to families.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.022

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicEating Disorders and Behaviors→French-language works237,207→