SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
Enteral tube feeding for cystic fibrosis.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enteral tube feeding for cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Brazilian Guidelines for Nutrition in Cystic Fibrosis.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2022Article
- Dynamics of Disease Progression and Gastrostomy Tube Placement in Children and Adolescents with Cystic Fibrosis: Application of Joint Models for Longitudinal and Time-to-Event Data.Internal medicine review (Washington, D.C. : Online) · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnteral tube feeding is routinely used in many cystic fibrosis centres when oral dietary and supplement intake has failed to achieve an adequate nutritional status. The use of this method of feeding is assessed on an individual basis taking into consideration the patients age and clinical status.
objectivesTo examine the evidence that in people with cystic fibrosis, supplemental enteral tube feeding improves nutritional status, respiratory function, and quality of life without significant adverse effects. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also contacted the companies that market enteral feeds and reviewed their databases.Date of the most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 13 February 2015.Date of the most recent hand search of PubMed and conference abstract books: 13 February 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials comparing supplemental enteral tube feeding for one month or longer with no specific intervention in people with cystic fibrosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The searches identified 38 trials; however, none were eligible for inclusion in this review. MAIN
resultsThere are no trials included in this review. AUTHORS'
conclusionsSupplemental enteral tube feeding is widely used throughout the world to improve nutritional status in people with cystic fibrosis. The methods mostly used, nasogastric or gastrostomy feeding, are expensive and may have a negative effect on self-esteem and body image. Reported use of enteral tube feeding suggests that it results in nutritional and respiratory improvement; but, efficacy has not been fully assessed by randomised controlled trials. It is acknowledged, however, that performing a randomised controlled trial would be difficult due to the ethics of withholding an intervention in a group of patients whose nutritional status necessitates it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.