ArticleJournal of general and family medicine2020
Survival time after marked reduction in oral intake in terminally ill noncancer patients: A retrospective study.
Article in Journal of general and family medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- 'How long do you think?' Unresponsive dying patients in a specialist palliative care service: A consecutive cohort study.Palliative medicine · 2024Article
- Prediction Models for Impending Death Using Physical Signs and Vital Signs in Noncancer Patients: A Prospective Longitudinal Observational Study.Palliative medicine reports · 2021Article
- Survival time after marked reduction in oral intake in terminally ill noncancer patients: A retrospective study.Journal of general and family medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prediction of short-term survival is important for noncancer patients and their families. Although a markedly reduced oral intake by cancer patients suggests a poor prognosis, the survival times of noncancer patients after its onset remain unclear. We herein investigated the time from a marked reduction in oral intake to death in noncancer patients as well as factors associated with their subsequent survival.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective medical record review of noncancer patients who died in our hospital between April 2017 and April 2018. We recorded the day when oral intake markedly decreased and the date of death. We extracted data on age, gender, the Charlson Comorbidities Index, mean daily fluid volume, laboratory test results, and vital signs converted to the Shock Index (SI). We used Cox's proportional hazards models to assess relationships between these factors and survival times after the onset of a markedly reduced oral intake.
resultsWe analyzed data from 44 noncancer patients. The median time from the onset of a markedly reduced oral intake to death was 16.5 days. Based on Cox's proportional hazards models, only SI ≧ 1.0 at the onset of a markedly reduced oral intake correlated with survival times (hazard ratio: 5.89, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.71-20.1,
conclusionNoncancer patients died a median of 16.5 days after the onset of a markedly reduced oral intake, and SI ≧1.0 correlated with subsequent survival times. These results will provide novel insights into the prognosis of noncancer patients at the end of life.
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.