ReviewCaspian journal of internal medicine2025
Disadvantages of various methods of gastrointestinal feeding in patients admitted to the intensive care unit: A systematic review.
Review in Caspian journal of internal medicine, 2025. 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.
- Does Intermittent Nutrition Enterally Normalise hormonal and metabolic responses to feeding in critically ill adults? The DINE-normal proof-of-concept study.Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2025Trial
- Enteral feeding barriers in the intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital in Ghana.The Southern African journal of critical care : the official journal of the Critical Care Society · 2026Article
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
Background: Gastrointestinal tube feeding is one of the most important and beneficial methods of nutrition in patients admitted to the intensive care unit. There is still no consensus on the best nutritional method that will lead to fewer complications. This study aimed to investigate the disadvantages of different methods of tube feeding in patients admitted to the adult intensive care unit. Methods: The present study is a review study conducted in 2022. Articles published in the English language databases including Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, and PubMed, between 2000 and 2022 were used. Results: In the initial search phase, 2893 articles were obtained. In the next step, after the review of titles and abstracts, 760 articles remained. Finally, based on inclusion criteria and full text review, 14 related articles were selected. Disadvantages of tube feeding methods were classified into four categories: "respiratory complications", "gastrointestinal complications", "metabolic complications" and "bed occupancy". Conclusions: Based on the results of this study, in terms of complications, intermittent and continuous methods are safer and more preferable than the bolus method. However, low-speed bolus feeding has fewer side effects.
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.