Cochrane · systematic review · CD005255
Responsive versus scheduled feeding for preterm infants
Watson, J, McGuire, W · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
NeonatalAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
2
current version
GRADE rated
2
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 2 · 100%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Responsive versus scheduled feeding for preterm infants
Population: preterm infants
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Weight change during study period (g/kg/day) Responsive vs scheduled feeding | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 305 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Time to establishment of full oral feeds (after trial entry) Responsive vs scheduled feeding | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 167 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |