ArticleBone marrow transplantation2023
Nutrition support and clinical outcomes following allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A randomised trial of topical polaprezinc to prevent oral mucositis in patients undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ToPaZ study).Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023Trial
- Prebiotic fiber enteral supplementation after allogeneic transplantation: feasibility and impact on the microbiome.Blood advances · 2025Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nutrition support is frequently required post allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT) and while there is some evidence on the benefits of enteral nutrition (EN), parenteral nutrition (PN) is widely used in practice. The study aimed to examine the impact of EN versus PN on early outcomes following SCT. All patients who underwent allogeneic SCT over 2.5 years were included in the analysis. Data was retrospectively collected on mode of nutrition support with clinical outcome data obtained from an existing database. Clinical outcomes were compared between groups by logistic, poisson and negative binomial regression, with adjustment for baseline confounders as appropriate. Patients who received EN then changed to PN had a longer length of hospital stay compared to those who received EN only (IR 1.24, 95% CI: 1.11-1.38, p < 0.001). Compared to those who received EN only, patients who received EN that changed to PN or PN only had a longer time to neutrophil engraftment (IR 1.11, 95% CI: 1.02-1.20, p = 0.016 and IR 1.16, 95% CI: 1.03-1.30, p = 0.017) and platelet engraftment (IR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08-1.33, p < 0.001 and IR 1.24, 95% CI 1.08-1.42, p = 0.002). Enteral nutrition should be first line nutritional support for patients undergoing allogeneic SCT.
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.