Impact of Early Nutritional Intervention During Cancer Treatment on Dietary Intakes and Cardiometabolic Health in Children and Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Pediatric cancer survivors are at greater risk of cardiometabolic complications than their peers. This study evaluates the preliminary impact of the VIE (Valorization, Implication, Education) intervention, which integrates nutrition, physical activity, and psychological support, on dietary intake and cardiometabolic health among children and adolescents during cancer treatment. Methods: This comparative study includes pediatric cancer patients recruited to either the VIE intervention group or a control group receiving standard care. Post-treatment data on dietary intake, anthropometric measures, blood pressure, and biochemical parameters were compared between groups and stratified by level of involvement in the nutritional intervention and age at diagnosis (children and adolescents). Results: In the intervention group, 45 participants were included (51.1% male, mean age at evaluation 10.2 ± 4.5 years, mean time since end of treatment of 1.3 ± 0.8 years), and the control group comprised 77 participants (44.2% male, mean age at evaluation 12.0 ± 5.6 years, mean time since end of treatment of 1.4 ± 0.8 years). The intervention group had lower total caloric intake (mean: 1759 ± 513 vs. 1997 ± 669 kcal, p = 0.042) and higher calcium intake (mean: 567 ± 240 vs. 432 ± 197 mg/1000 kcal, p = 0.001). The participants who were highly involved in the nutritional intervention had greater protein-derived energy intake than the controls (mean: 17 ± 5 vs. 15 ± 4%, p = 0.029). While there was a tendency for a lesser proportion of cardiometabolic risk factors in the adolescents from the intervention group, the differences did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: The VIE intervention improved some specific dietary intakes in the medium term after treatment completion but did not significantly impact cardiometabolic health outcomes. Additional strategies are needed to improve the diet of pediatric cancer patients, and further research is warranted to assess the long-term impact of such interventions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".