Cochrane · systematic review · CD009840
Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake in malnourished or nutritionally at‐risk adults
Baldwin, C, Kimber, KL, Gibbs, M, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
Metabolic and Endocrine DisordersAMSTAR 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
7
current version
GRADE rated
7
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 4 · 57.1%Low 1 · 14.3%Moderate 2 · 28.6%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
Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake versus comparators in malnourished or nutritionally at‐risk adults
Population: malnourished or nutritionally at‐risk adults
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake vs comparators | RR 0.78 [0.66, 0.92] | 12 studies · 6683 participants | Moderate |
Morbidity/complications (number of participants with any medical complication) Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake vs comparators | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 4015 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Health‐related quality of life and patient satisfaction Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake vs comparators | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 4451 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Hospitalisation and institutionalisation (days) Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake vs comparators | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 667 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Adverse events Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake vs comparators | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 4108 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Nutritional status (weight change in kg) Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake vs comparators | no estimate extracted | 17 studies · 2024 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Economic costs Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake vs comparators | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 1152 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |