ArticleJournal of nutrition and metabolism2026
Perception and Practices Regarding Muscle Loss Protection in Childhood Cancer Patients: A National Survey of Chinese Pediatric Oncologists in China.
Article in Journal of nutrition and metabolism, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Perception and Practices Regarding Muscle Loss Protection in Childhood Cancer Patients: A National Survey of Chinese Pediatric Oncologists in China.Journal of nutrition and metabolism · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate perception and practices regarding muscle loss protection (MLP) among Chinese pediatric oncologists in a nationwide survey. Methods: A nationwide online survey was conducted among pediatric oncologists using a self-designed structured questionnaire assessing predominant roles, barriers, practices, attitudes, and knowledge. Behavior and attitude were measured using a 5-point Likert scale. Barrier scores were based on classification: denial scores 3, uncertainty 2, and confirmation 1. Knowledge scores were calculated based on the number of correct responses (one point per correct answer). Binary logistic regression, ordinal logistic regression, and multiple linear regression models were applied to identify factors associated with knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and composite scores related to MLP, and spatial analysis (Moran's I) was used to evaluate geographic clustering. Results: Among 253 respondents, physicians, surgeons, physiatrists, and nutritionists were most trusted to lead MLP. Physicians, particularly hematologists, received the most support as the predominant specialists. While the absence of relevant guidelines and consensus was a significant barrier, the primary barrier was illness severity. Although the general attitude was positive, behavior and knowledge were far from satisfactory. Doctors in centers with ML assessment resources had significantly higher practice scores. Spatial analysis indicated regional variation in scores, with localized patterns of relatively higher and lower performance across provinces. Conclusion: Chinese pediatric oncologists demonstrate positive attitudes but concerning deficiencies in MLP practices and knowledge, with notable disparities primarily associated with institutional resources and regional context. The development of evidence-based national guidelines is strongly recommended to standardize care and address these gaps.
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.