Nutritional Management in Severe Burn Patients: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with severe burns frequently experience inadequate nutrition due to hypermetabolism and its associated complications, substantially increasing the risk of malnutrition. This case report describes the nutritional intervention for a 54-year-old male patient admitted with total body surface area burns of 42.4%, including 15% third-degree burns caused by flames. It highlights the importance of active nutritional support and continuous monitoring during the management of complex burn cases. Upon admission, the patient's nutritional intake was restricted due to fluid resuscitation, frequent surgeries requiring fasting, renal dysfunction, and gastrointestinal complications. Nutritional requirements were calculated using the Harris-Benedict and Toronto equations; however, it was difficult to meet the targeted nutritional demands during the initial Nutrition Support Team (NST) consultation due to renal dysfunction and hemodynamic instability. Subsequent efforts, including oral nutritional supplements and adjunctive parenteral nutrition, were implemented; however, multifactorial issues, such as systemic deterioration and complications, further exacerbated the patient's nutritional status. As a result, the patient experienced a 15% reduction in his usual body weight, decreasing from 100 kg to 85 kg. This case underscores the vital role of proactive NST involvement and ongoing nutritional intervention in the management of patients with severe burns and complex complications.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".