Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31783495›Full record

ReviewNutrients2019

Optimizing Nutrition Assessment to Create Better Outcomes in Lung Transplant Recipients: A Review of Current Practices.

Mara Weber Gulling, Monica Schaefer, Laura Bishop-Simo, Brian C Keller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrients, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. The Path Forward: A Review on Enhanced Recovery After Cardiothoracic Transplantation.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors.

Mara Weber GullingNutrition Services, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Monica SchaeferNutrition Services, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Laura Bishop-SimoNutrition Services, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Brian C KellerDivision of Pulmonary, Critical Care & Sleep Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lung transplantation offers patients with end-stage lung disease an opportunity for a better quality of life, but with limited organ availability it is paramount that selected patients have the best opportunity for successful outcomes. Nutrition plays a central role in post-surgical outcomes and, historically, body mass index (BMI) has been used as the de facto method of assessing a lung transplant candidate's nutritional status. Here, we review the historical origins of BMI in lung transplantation, summarize the current BMI literature, and review studies of alternative/complementary body composition assessment tools, including lean psoas area, creatinine-height index, leptin, and dual x-ray absorptiometry. These body composition measures quantify lean body mass versus fat mass and may provide a more comprehensive analysis of a patient's nutritional state than BMI alone.

Indexed as

Lung TransplantationNutrition AssessmentTransplant RecipientsTreatment OutcomeAbsorptiometry, PhotonBody CompositionBody Mass IndexHumansLeptinMuscle, SkeletalNutritional StatusPatient SelectionPreoperative PeriodSarcopeniaLeptinbody compositionbody mass indexcreatinine-height indexlean body massleptinlung transplantationmuscle massnutritionsarcopenia

Identifiers

PMID31783495
PMCPMC6950219

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.