ArticleClinical nutrition ESPEN2022
Protein requirements and provision in hospitalised COVID-19 ward and ICU patients: Agreement between calculations based on body weight and height, and measured bioimpedance lean body mass.
Article in Clinical nutrition ESPEN, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalized protein delivery in critical care: from phenotyping and endotyping to post-ICU recovery.Current opinion in critical care · 2026Review
- Body composition-guided protein dosing in critically ill patients: a before-and-after study (PROGRESS-ICU).Critical care (London, England) · 2026Observational
- Current concepts on feeding the critically ill patient: a narrative review.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- Towards optimised nutrition therapy after critical illness: a position statement and research framework by the global research initiative on post-intensive care nutrition (GRIP) consortium.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
- Sarcopenia and COVID-19 Outcomes.Clinical interventions in aging · 2023Review
- Assessment of body composition in adults hospitalized with acute COVID-19: a scoping review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA large proportion of hospitalised COVID-19 patients are overweight. There is no consensus in the literature on how lean body mass (LBM) can best be estimated to adequately guide nutritional protein recommendations in hospitalised patients who are not at an ideal weight. We aim to explore which method best agrees with lean body mass as measured by bioelectric impedance (LBM
methodsLBM was calculated by five commonly used methods for 150 hospitalised COVID-19 patients previously included in the BIAC-19 study; total body weight, regression to a BMI of 22.5, regression to BMI 27.5 when BMI>30, and the equations described by Gallagher and the ESPEN ICU guideline. Error-standard plots were used to assess agreement and bias compared to LBM
resultsAll methods to calculate LBM suffered from overestimation, underestimation, fixed- and proportional bias and wide limits of agreement compared to LBM
conclusionsWe could not identify a mathematical method for calculating LBM that had an acceptable agreement with LBM as derived from BIA for males and females across all BMI subgroups in our hospitalised COVID-19 population. Consequently, discrepancies when assessing the adequacy of protein provision in ICU patients were found. We strongly advise using baseline LBM
trial registrationThe protocol of the BIAC-19 study, of which this is a post-hoc sub-analysis, is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (number NL8562).
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.