Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29500682›Full record

ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2018

Integral nutritional approach to the care of cancer patients: results from a Delphi panel.

M Durán-Poveda, P Jimenez-Fonseca, M Sirvent-Ochando, P P García-Luna, J L Pereira-Cunill, B Lema-Marqués, M T Parejo-Arrondo, C Belda-Iniesta

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

M Durán-PovedaDepartment of Digestive and General Surgery, Hospital Universitario Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
P Jimenez-FonsecaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias (HUCA), Oviedo, Spain.
M Sirvent-OchandoDepartment of Hospital Pharmacy, Hospital HLA-Vistahermosa, Alicante, Spain.
P P García-LunaDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
J L Pereira-CunillDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
B Lema-MarquésNutrition Department, Clínica Diagonal, Esplugues de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain.
M T Parejo-ArrondoOncology Nursing Department, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, Reus, Tarragona, Spain.
C Belda-IniestaDepartment of Medical Oncology, HM CIOCC, Calle Oña 10, 28050, Madrid, Spain. cbelda@hmhospitales.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3254-7492
Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío · ESClínica Diagonal · ESHM Hospitales · ESHospital Universitario Central de Asturias · ESHospital Universitario Rey Juan Carlos · ESHospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus · ES

Funding

Fresenius Kabi 51085
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMalnutrition is a common complication in cancer patients and can negatively affect the outcome of treatments. This study aimed to reach a consensus on nutritional needs and optimize nutritional care in the management of cancer patients at a national level.

methodsA qualitative, multicenter, two-round Delphi study involving 52 specialists with experience in nutritional support in cancer patients was conducted.

resultsRegarding the presence of malnutrition, 57.7% of the participants stated that < 30% of the patients had malnutrition at the time of diagnosis, 40.4% considered that 31-50% had malnutrition during cancer treatment, and 26.9% that > 50% at the end of the treatment. Forty percent of participants believed that the main objective of nutritional treatment was to improve quality of life and 34.6% to improve tolerability and adherence to chemotherapy. The quality nutritional care provided at their centers was rated as medium-low by 67.3%. Enteral and parenteral nutrition was administered to less than 10% and less than 5% of patients in 40.4 and 76.9% of cases, respectively. In relation to nutritional screening at the time of diagnosis, 62.9% of participants considered than screening to assess the risk of malnutrition was performed in < 30% of patients.

conclusionsThere is an important variability in the management of cancer patient nutrition, which is associated with the absence of a national consensus on nutritional support in this field. Given the incidence of nutritional disorders in cancer patients, a specialist in clinical nutrition (regardless of his/her specialty) should be integrated into the strategic cancer plan.

Indexed as

Nutritional SupportAdultDelphi TechniqueFemaleHumansMaleMalnutritionMiddle AgedNeoplasmsParenteral NutritionCancer patientsDelphi studyEnteral nutritionNutritionNutritional supportParenteral nutrition

Identifiers

PMID29500682
OpenAlexW2790997341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.