ArticleBMJ open2022
Nutritional risk factors for all-cause mortality of critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic and application guidelines for malnutrition in adult patients (2025 edition).Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition · 2025Guideline
- Evaluation of the clinical characteristics and risk factors for in-hospital mortality amongst older persons admitted with bacteraemia in a geriatric ward - a single tertiary centre review.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Article
- Ratio of procalcitonin/Simpson's dominance index predicted the short-term prognosis of patients with severe bacterial pneumonia.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to explore the predictive value of single and multiple risk factors for the clinical outcomes of critically ill patients receiving enteral nutrition and to establish an effective evaluation model.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingData from the 2020-2021 period were collected from the electronic records of the First Affiliated Hospital, Nanjing Medical University.
participants459 critically ill patients with enteral nutrition in the geriatric intensive care unit were included in the study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The secondary outcomes were 28-day invasive mechanical ventilation time, intensive care unit stay, Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) score and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score.
resultsIndependent prognostic factors, including prealbumin/procalcitonin (PCT) ratio and APACHE II score, were identified using a logistic regression model and used in the nomogram. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and concordance index indicated that the predictive capacity of the model was 0.753. Moreover, both the prealbumin/PCT ratio and the combination model of PCT, prealbumin and NRS2002 had a higher predictive value for clinical outcomes. Subgroup analysis also identified that a higher inflammatory state (PCT >0.5 ng/mL) and major nutritional risk (NRS2002 >3) led to worse clinical outcomes. In addition, patients on whole protein formulae bore less nutritional risk than those on short peptide formulae.
conclusionsThis nomogram had a good predictive value for 28-day mortality in critically ill patients receiving enteral nutrition. Both the prealbumin/PCT ratio and the combination model (PCT, prealbumin and NRS2002), as composite models of inflammation and nutrition, could better predict the prognosis of critically ill patients.
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.