ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2023
Early parenteral nutrition comparing to enteral nutrition cannot reduce 28-day mortality in critically ill patients: a retrospective comparative cohort study based on the MIMIC‑IV database.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the effects of different models of nutrient supply on nutritional status and clinical outcomes in ICU patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of Early Enteral Nutrition Versus Early Parenteral Nutrition in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Nutrients · 2024Pooled it
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Enteral nutrition (EN) is recommended as the first choice by guidelines for critical ill patients. But the timing of safe and effective delivery of parenteral nutrition (PN) is unclear and the results of previous studies are controversial. There is insufficient evidence for the use of early PN, so we designed this cohort study to compared the clinical outcomes of critical ill patients who received early PN with those who did not. Methods: This retrospective study conducted using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-IV database. Patients who received nutrition therapy within 3 days of ICU admission were included and we categorized them as patients who received any kind of PN (PN group) or only enteral nutrition (EN group). Confounding factors were adjusted by propensity-score matching (PSM). The primary outcome was the 28-day mortality rate, and secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS) in the hospital and ICU, hospital infection, and mechanical ventilation time. Results: A total of 5,019 patients (PN group, 357; EN group, 4,662) were included in the analyses. The 28-day mortality rates showed no significant intergroup difference (EN, 22.3% Conclusions: PN within 3 days of ICU admission did not reduce the 28-day mortality rate and could extend hospital LOS. This study supports further fundamental and clinical research to ascertain the effect of PN for ICU 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.