SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2019
Enteral tube feeding for cystic fibrosis.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors guiding gastrostomy tube decision-making for caregivers of children with cystic fibrosis: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2023Article
- The Challenges of Eating Well for People Living with Cystic Fibrosis: an Interview Study Exploring the Use of Mindful Eating Approaches and Behaviours to Support Optimal Nutritional Status.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2022Article
- Risk Factors of Malnutrition in Children with Cystic Fibrosis: A 14-year Retrospective Study from Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 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. This is a final update of a previously published review.
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: 10 July 2019.Date of the most recent hand search of PubMed: 26 October 2018. 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 44 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 people 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.