ReviewCurrent opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care2025
Circadian rhythms, metabolism, and nutrition support in critically ill adult patients: a narrative review.
Review in Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care, 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.
- Improving the Outcome of Brain-Injured Patients by Non-Continuous Feeding to Prevent Dysbiosis.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Real-world implementation of a standardized ICU protocol for daytime-restricted enteral nutrition in critically ill adults: A retrospective quality improvement study.Clinical nutrition open science · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe human circadian system regulates several physiological processes, including metabolism, which becomes significantly disrupted during critical illness. The common use of 24-h continuous nutrition support feeding in the intensive care unit (ICU) may further exacerbate these disruptions; this review evaluates recent evidence comparing continuous and intermittent feeding schedules in critically ill adults. RECENT
findingsResearch comparing different feeding schedules in critically ill adults remains limited. Recent meta-analyses suggest that continuous and intermittent feeding schedules in the ICU have comparable adverse event profiles, including gastrointestinal intolerance. A retrospective study found that continuous feeding did not impact the 24-h glucose variation in critically ill adults, and a randomized controlled trial reported no significant differences in amino acid, lipid-based, or small molecule metabolite profiles between the two feeding regimens. Potential benefits of intermittent feeding include stimulation of muscle protein synthesis, preservation of normal hormone secretion, and improved attainment of nutritional goals. SUMMARY: Current evidence suggests comparable safety profiles for continuous and intermittent feeding schedules in critically ill adult patients. However, intermittent and daytime cyclic feeding are expected to align more closely with normal circadian physiology. Given the lack of existing supportive data, a dynamic approach - transitioning from continuous feeding in the early-acute metabolic phase to intermittent feeding or daytime cyclic feeding - may be appropriate.
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.