ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2025
Development and Internal Validation of a Clinical Prediction Model for Refeeding Syndrome in Adult Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Retrospective Observational Study.
Article in International journal of general 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.
- Development and Internal Validation of a Web-Based Dynamic Nomogram for Dynamic Risk Stratification of Early Bacterial Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients.Annals of transplantation · 2026Article
- Explainable machine learning model to predict refeeding syndrome in patients with severe acute pancreatitis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Refeeding syndrome (RFS) is a potentially life-threatening complication during nutritional rehabilitation in malnourished patients, especially those in intensive care units (ICUs). This study aimed to develop and internally validate a clinical prediction model for assessing the risk of RFS in adult ICU patients. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted at Beijing Jishuitan Hospital from January 2022 to November 2023. Adult ICU patients at high risk for RFS, identified by nutritional assessment, were included. RFS was defined as a >10% decrease in serum phosphorus, potassium, or magnesium within 5 days after refeeding. Demographic, clinical, and biochemical data were collected from electronic medical records. For the biochemical data, the baseline (the day before refeeding), peak (highest measurements during the first five days after refeeding), and latest value (the fifth day after refeeding) value were analyzed. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression, with stepwise selection, identified independent predictors. Model performance was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis (area under the curve, AUC), calibration plots, and decision curve analysis (DCA), with internal validation performed using bootstrap resampling. Results: A total of 132 ICU patients were included (RFS group, n=86; non-RFS group, n=46). Baseline characteristics, illness severity scores, and comorbidities, were generally comparable between groups. Multivariable analysis showed that higher peak urine epithelial cell count (OR=1.145, 95% CI: 1.023-1.282), lower baseline total bilirubin (OR=0.969, 95% CI: 0.940-1.000), lower peak potassium (OR=0.383, 95% CI: 0.147-0.995), and lower latest relative lymphocyte count (OR=0.946, 95% CI: 0.897-0.997) were independently associated with RFS risk. The model demonstrated good discrimination (AUC=0.78, 95% CI: 0.69-0.87) and calibration. DCA indicated clinical utility across a range of risk thresholds. Conclusion: This internally validated model accurately predicts RFS risk in high-risk adult ICU patients, potentially improving early identification and individualized nutritional management. Further external validation is needed before wider clinical application.
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.