MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413385833 · doi:10.1016/j.jhlto.2025.100379

Improving nutrition in pediatric heart failure

2025· review· en· W4413385833 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon Oliver, Stephanie Lavoie, Chentel Cunningham, Jennifer Conway

Bibliographic record

VenueJHLT Open · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart failureMedicineIntensive care medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart failure occurs in 0.9 to 3 per 100,000 children, and can be the result of either structural heart disease, genetic, or acquired cardiomyopathies. Malnutrition remains a major concern in this population, and results from the complex interplay between decreased dietary intake, decreased absorption, and an altered metabolic state. Assessing nutritional status remains a challenge, with conventional anthropometric measures often being unsuitable. To this end, the Subjective Global Nutrition Assessment has been developed and this, in combination with indirect calorimetry, can be used to give a better estimate of a child's nutritional status and caloric needs. Determining the best way to meet these needs requires a multidisciplinary team approach, determining both the most appropriate feeding route and most appropriate type of feed. This is particularly important with the trend toward blended feeds, as these feeds must not only meet protein-energy requirements but must also not exceed daily sodium requirements or fluid restrictions. To further optimize heart failure through nutrition, the use of micronutrient supplementation has evolved. In particular, optimizing vitamin D, selenium, and iron has been shown to be beneficial from a heart failure management perspective. As nutrition plays such a vital role in the medical optimization of pediatric patients with heart failure, it is important to acknowledge the impact this can have on the child and the family unit.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJHLT OpenSame topicClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFrench-language works237,207