ReviewNutrients2020
Trial Design in Critical Care Nutrition: The Past, Present and Future.
Review in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinimetric properties of the core outcome measurement instruments for clinical effectiveness trials of nutritional and metabolic interventions in critical illness (CONCISE).Critical care (London, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Core outcome measures for clinical effectiveness trials of nutritional and metabolic interventions in critical illness: an international modified Delphi consensus study evaluation (CONCISE).Critical care (London, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Attenuating Muscle Mass Loss in Critical Illness: the Role of Nutrition and Exercise.Current osteoporosis reports · 2022Review
- How much underfeeding can the critically ill adult patient tolerate?Journal of intensive medicine · 2022Review
- C-reactive protein in immunometabolism: spared from 'paying the piper'.Intensive care medicine · 2022Article
- Nutritional Interventions on Physical Functioning for Critically Ill Patients: An Integrative Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Review
- Post-intensive care syndrome: Recent advances and future directions.Acute medicine & surgeryReview
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
The specialty of nutrition in critical care is relatively modern, and accordingly, trial design has progressed over recent decades. In the past, small observational and physiological studies evolved to become small single-centre comparative trials, but these had significant limitations by today's standards. Power calculations were often not undertaken, outcomes were not specified a priori, and blinding and randomisation were not always rigorous. These trials have been superseded by larger, more carefully designed and conducted multi-centre trials. Progress in trial conduct has been facilitated by a greater understanding of statistical concepts and methodological design. In addition, larger numbers of potential study participants and increased access to funding support trials able to detect smaller differences in outcomes. This narrative review outlines why critical care nutrition research is unique and includes a historical critique of trial design to provide readers with an understanding of how and why things have changed. This review focuses on study methodology, population group, intervention, and outcomes, with a discussion as to how these factors have evolved, and concludes with an insight into what we believe trial design may look like in the future. This will provide perspective on the translation of the critical care nutrition literature into clinical practice.
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.