Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27775609›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of molecular sciences2016

Meta-Analysis of Early Nutrition: The Benefits of Enteral Feeding Compared to a Nil Per Os Diet Not Only in Severe, but Also in Mild and Moderate Acute Pancreatitis.

Katalin Márta, Nelli Farkas, Imre Szabó, Anita Illés, Áron Vincze, Gabriella Pár, Patrícia Sarlós, Judit Bajor, Ákos Szűcs, József Czimmer and 5 more

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of molecular sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Katalin MártaInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. katalin.martak@gmail.com.
Nelli FarkasInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. nelli.farkas@aok.pte.hu.
Imre SzabóDepartment of Gastroenterology, First Department of Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. szaboimi@yahoo.com.
Anita IllésDepartment of Gastroenterology, First Department of Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. anitai@freemail.hu.
Áron VinczeDepartment of Gastroenterology, First Department of Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. vincze.aron@pte.hu.
Gabriella PárDepartment of Gastroenterology, First Department of Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. pargabriella@gmail.com.
Patrícia SarlósInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. sarlos.patricia@pte.hu.
Judit BajorInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. bajor.judit8@gmail.com.
Ákos SzűcsInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. szucs.akos@gmail.com.
József CzimmerDepartment of Gastroenterology, First Department of Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. czimmer.jozsef@pte.hu.
Dóra MosztbacherInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. dora.mosztbacher@gmail.com.
Andrea PárniczkyInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. andrea.parniczky@gmail.com.
Kata SzemesInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. szemesk@gmail.com.
Dániel PécsiInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. daniel.pecsi1991@gmail.com.
Péter HegyiInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs H-7624, Hungary. hegyi.peter@pte.hu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recently published guidelines for acute pancreatitis (AP) suggest that enteral nutrition (EN) should be the primary therapy in patients suffering from severe acute pancreatitis (SAP); however, none of the guidelines have recommendations on mild and moderate AP (MAP). A meta-analysis was performed using the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P). The following PICO (problem, intervention, comparison, outcome) was applied: P: nutrition in AP; I: enteral nutrition (EN); C: nil per os diet (NPO); and O: outcome. There were 717 articles found in Embase, 831 in PubMed, and 10 in the Cochrane database. Altogether, seven SAP and six MAP articles were suitable for analyses. In SAP, forest plots were used to illustrate three primary endpoints (mortality, multiorgan failure, and intervention). In MAP, 14 additional secondary endpoints were analyzed (such as CRP (C-reactive protein), WCC (white cell count), complications, etc.). After pooling the data, the Mann-Whitney

Indexed as

DietDiet TherapyEnteral NutritionHumansNutritional StatusPancreatitisParenteral Nutritionacute pancreatitisearly nutritionenergyenteral feedingmeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID27775609
PMCPMC5085723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.