Summary of findings table ‐ Re‐feeding vs discarding gastric residuals: Number of infants with feed interruption episodes (lasting ≥ 12 hours)
It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table ‐ Re‐feeding changes number of infants with feed interruption episodes lasting ≥ 12 hours compared with discarding gastric residuals (very low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Summary of findings table ‐ Re‐feeding vs discarding gastric residuals Number of infants with feed interruption episodes lasting ≥ 12 hours · preterm infants It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table ‐ Re‐feeding changes number of infants with feed interruption episodes lasting ≥ 12 hours compared with discarding gastric residuals (very low certainty). Re‐feeding versus discarding gastric residuals to improve growth in preterm infants (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.8 [0.42, 1.52] | 1 study · 59 participants | Very low |
Re‐feeding vs discarding gastric residual Number of infants with episodes of interruption of feeds ≥ 12 hours · preterm infants It is very uncertain whether re‐feeding changes number of infants with episodes of interruption of feeds ≥ 12 hours compared with discarding gastric residual (very low certainty). Re‐feeding versus discarding gastric residuals to improve growth in preterm infants (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD012940.PUB2, superseded | RR 0.8 [0.42, 1.52] | 1 study · 59 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Re‐feeding versus discarding gastric residuals to improve growth in preterm infants 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
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.