Observational studyRevista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina)2025
Comparison of the NUTRIC, NUTRICm and NUTRICpcr scores in critically ill patients ventilated for COVID-19.
Observational study in Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina), 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a dramatic increase in ICU admissions due to severe acute respiratory syndrome. The NUTRIC score (with IL-6) and its variants NUTRICm (without IL-6) and NUTRICpcr (CRP instead of IL-6) were proposed to evaluate nutritional risk (RN) and even prognosis in critically ill patients. Methods: Scores with inflammatory biomarkers (NUTRIC and NUTRICpcr) and without them (NUTRICm) were evaluated through a prospective and observational study to discriminate mortality and assess NB in patients ventilated for COVID-19. Results: 418 patients were analyzed. The median (IQR) age and APACHE II were: 54 years (6-61) and 13 points (10-19). 79% died in the ICU. The highest agreement was between NUTRICm and NUTRICpcr (Kappa= 0.88). The AUCROC (95% CI) to discriminate mortality was: NUTRIC 0.661 (0.598-0.724), NUTRICpcr 0.635 (0.572-0.697) and NUTRICm 0.659 (0.596-0.722). The high RN classification showed differences between the scores with and without an inflammatory biomarker, being significant between NUTRIC and NUTRICm (14.6% vs 22.7%, p 0.0033). Conclusion: In ventilated COVID-19 patients, the three nutritional risk scores studied discriminate mortality in a similar way, but the assessment of high NR differs between them, with a higher prevalence for the NUTRICm, which omits the inflammatory biomarker.
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.