ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2026
An Exploratory Assessment on Differing Supplemental Feeding Methods and Associated Pediatric Neurorehabilitation Outcomes.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To identify functional differences of continued nasogastric tube (NG) compared with new gastrostomy (GT) tube for enteral feeding support in pediatric neurorehabilitation patients admitted to inpatient rehabilitation (IPR). Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Pediatric IPR facility. Participants: A total of 74 children and adolescents (N=74) (47 boys/27 girls, age mean ± SD=10.7±5.1y) with new neurologic impairments because of acquired brain injury and admitted to pediatric IPR with either NG or new GT tube for supplemental feeding. Interventions: Standard of care IPR treatment. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was the change in International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative Functional Diet Scale (IDDSI-FDS) score at IPR admission and discharge. Secondary outcome measures included the cognitive components of the Functional Independence Measure in Children (WeeFIM) and body mass index. Results: At admission, rates of continued NG (51%) and new GT (49%) were similar. IPR treatment resulted in statistically significant improvements in eating function (IDDSI-FDS score median [interquartile range], 0 [0-2.25] to 8 [4.75-8] points; χ Conclusions: Feeding tube type at IPR admission may be correlated with functional outcome at discharge home in patients with new neurologic impairments because of acquired brain injury.
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.