ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
Peptide-based versus standard polymeric enteral nutrition in the PICU: a multicenter observational study.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 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
35 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nutritional guidelines recommend initiating enteral nutrition with standard polymeric formula (SPF) in critically ill children. Peptide-based formulas (PBF) have been increasingly used to improve enteral nutrition and reduce related complications. This study evaluated the clinical outcomes associated with PBF use compared with SPF in the PICU setting. Methods: This multicenter, prospective study included pediatric patients admitted to PICUs who received enteral nutrition. Patients receiving PBFs were compared with those receiving SPFs. To reduce baseline imbalances and potential confounding, propensity score matching with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied. Results: A total of 574 patients were included. After IPTW adjustment, baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups. The rate of achieving target caloric intake by day 2 was significantly higher in the SPF group ( Conclusions: Although early caloric and protein intake was higher in patients receiving standard polymeric formulas, outcomes were comparable by day 7. Lower infection rates and reduced need for mechanical ventilation were observed in patients receiving peptide-based formulas. Enteral formula selection should be individualized, and further studies are needed to clarify this subject.
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.