SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2026
Summary of the best evidence for whole-course nutritional management of bladder cancer.
Synthesis 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To synthesize the best evidence for whole-course nutritional management of bladder cancer (BC) and to obtain a structured summary of evidence for clinical guidance. Methods: A full search was conducted in multiple websites and databases (11 electronic databases, 10 guideline websites, and 14 major professional society websites) for expert consensus, expert recommendations, guidelines, evidence summaries, randomized controlled trials, and systematic reviews related to BC nutrition until December 2025, with a supplementary search in January 2026. The included studies underwent quality assessment, extraction and summary of evidence, and two-round Delphi expert consultation. A total of 17 experts were invited to participate in the first round, and 15 experts were invited in the second round. Results: Sixteen studies were included: one expert recommendation, one clinical decision, three expert consensus articles, four evidence summaries, and seven guidelines. We summarized 91 evidence statements across seven dimensions: nutrition team formation and management processes, three-tier nutritional diagnosis, principles of nutrition support therapy, content of nutritional interventions, nutritional surveillance, health education, and nutritional follow-up. The expert authority coefficient (Cr) was 0.88 for both rounds of consultation, and Kendall's coefficients of concordance were 0.250 and 0.313, respectively, indicating acceptable expert authority. Conclusion: This study summarized the best evidence for whole-course nutritional management of BC across treatment methods and nutritional statuses. The findings lay an evidence-based basis for clinical practice, especially for patients with nutritional risk undergoing radical cystectomy. Systematic review registration: https://nursing.fudan.edu.cn/38724/list.htm, identifier ES20258783.
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.