SynthesisScientific reports2026
Incidence and mortality of refeeding syndrome in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To systematically review the literature and to synthesize evidence regarding the incidence and mortality of refeeding syndrome in critically ill patients. This study was registered on the PROSPERO database. We performed a systematic review on the Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies including critically ill adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients that reported the incidence and/or mortality of refeeding syndrome were eligible. Two reviewers independently screened studies , extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies and the Cochrane Collaboration tool for RCT. The pooled effect estimates for binary and continuous variables are shown using proportions, odds ratio (OR), or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Twenty-eight studies including 10,412 patients were analyzed. The reported incidence of refeeding syndrome ranged from 0% to 88%, with a pooled incidence of 23% (95% CI 15–33), showing substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 99%). In sensitivity analyses stratified by age, the pooled incidence was 29% (95% CI 19–41) in adults, 5% (95% CI 3–9) in pediatric patients, and 25% (95% CI 17–35) in neonates. No consistent association between refeeding syndrome and mortality was observed in the overall population (OR 1.51, 95% CI 0.79–2.88), nor in adult or pediatric subgroups. Evidence regarding neonatal mortality was limited to a single study. Refeeding syndrome was frequently observed among critically ill patients and showed substantial variability across age groups and study definitions. In this meta-analysis, refeeding syndrome was not statistically associated with mortality; however, the certainty of evidence was low and heterogeneity was high. These findings highlight the need for standardized definitions and higher-quality studies to better clarify the clinical implications of refeeding syndrome in critically ill populations.
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.