ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2024
Evaluation of Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of Supplementary Parenteral Nutrition in ICU Patients.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This evaluation aims to provide a reference for clinical decision-making regarding the use of SPN in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The objective of this study is to evaluate the quality of clinical practice guidelines for the use of supplementary parenteral nutrition (SPN) in ICU patients, both domestically and internationally. Patients and Methods: The quality of clinical practice recommendations for SPN use in ICU patients was assessed using a systematic approach. Results: Five nutrition recommendations in total were included for analysis. The average standardized scores for the recommendations across the six domains of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) are as follows: Scope and purpose scored 87.96%, stakeholder Involvement scored 68.52%, rigour of development scored 73.40%, clarity of presentation scored 84.80%, applicability scored 64.72%, and editorial independence scored 91.10%. In the comprehensive evaluation, two guidelines were rated as grade A recommendations, and three were rated as grade B recommendations. Most guidelines recommended against early use of SPN when energy and protein requirements could not be met solely through enteral nutrition (EN) in ICU patients. The guidelines emphasized achieving target energy levels and discontinuing parenteral nutrition (PN) as soon as the energy requirements were met to prevent overfeeding. Conclusion: This study utilized the AGREE II scale to assess the quality of five nutrition guidelines. All 5 guidelines were deemed acceptable Recommendations include focusing on participants, rigour, and applicability to enhance guideline quality. Clinicians should exercise professional judgment when applying guidelines as they complement training and judgment, rather than replacing them.
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.