Enteral vs parenteral nutrition: Adverse events: Vomiting
- Population
- critically ill adults admitted to the ICU for trauma, emergency, or post‐surgical care; population excludes participants with acute pancreatitis
- Intervention
- Enteral
- Comparison
- parenteral nutrition
- Outcome
- Adverse events: Vomiting
It is very uncertain whether enteral changes adverse events: vomiting (as reported by study authors at end of study compared with parenteral nutrition (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Enteral vs parenteral nutrition Adverse events: vomiting (as reported by study authors at end of study · critically ill adults admitted to the ICU for trauma, emergency, or surgical care; population excluded people with… It is very uncertain whether enteral changes adverse events: vomiting (as reported by study authors at end of study compared with parenteral nutrition (very low certainty). Enteral versus parenteral nutrition and enteral versus a combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition for… (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 3.42 [1.15, 10.16] | 3 studies · 2525 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enteral versus parenteral nutrition and enteral versus a combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition for adults in the intensive care… 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Enteral vs enteral and parenteral nutrition · critically ill adults admitted to the ICU for trauma, emergency, or post‐surgical care;… · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.