Trial reportEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2025
Comparison of the digestive tolerance of an oligomeric versus a polymeric oral nutritional supplement in people with anorexia nervosa. A randomised crossover clinical trial.
Trial report in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05184738 (Evaluation of the Tolerance of Two Oral Nutritional Supplements in Patients with Anorexia Nervosa), which is not on this 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.
Evaluation of the Tolerance of Two Oral Nutritional Supplements in Patients with Anorexia Nervosa
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost people with anorexia nervosa (pAN) have digestive symptoms, which affect tolerance to nutritional treatment. Oligomeric oral nutritional supplements may be better absorbed and tolerated than polymeric ones. Our aim was to compare an oligomeric versus a polymeric nutritional supplement in pAN in terms of worsening of digestive symptoms after ingestion (primary objective) and in terms of sensory perception of the supplement (secondary objective).
methodsA randomised, crossover, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was conducted. Inclusion criteria were: male or female aged 12-50 years with anorexia nervosa treated at the Eating Disorders Unit of the Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, Spain. Participants were randomised to first receive one container of the oligomeric or polymeric supplement. A digestive symptom questionnaire was administered, which they completed again after taking the supplement, together with a questionnaire for sensory evaluation of the supplement. One week later, they received a container of the other type of supplement, and the process was repeated. Analysis was performed on a per protocol basis.
resultsTen people were randomised to the oligomeric-polymeric sequence and 12 to the polymeric-oligomeric sequence, of whom 9 and 11, respectively, finally received the intervention and were analysed. There were no statistically significant differences in digestive symptoms between the two supplements. The oligomeric one scored lower on taste and higher on acidity. The median (interquartile range) for oligomeric and polymeric were respectively: taste 6.5 (4), 8(3), p 0.03; acidity 0 (1), 0 (0), p 0.01.
conclusionsIn pAN, there is no difference in the worsening of digestive symptoms after ingestion of oligomeric versus polymeric supplements. Polymerics are perceived as having better taste and less acidity.
trial registrationThe trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT05184738.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40164776What 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.