Meta-analysis is not enough: The critical role of pathophysiology in determining optimal care in clinical nutrition

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00179906%3A_____%2F16%3A10332622" target="_blank" >RIV/00179906:_____/16:10332622 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11150/16:10332622

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2015.08.008" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2015.08.008</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2015.08.008" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.clnu.2015.08.008</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Meta-analysis is not enough: The critical role of pathophysiology in determining optimal care in clinical nutrition

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Evidence based medicine has preferably been based on prospective randomized controlled trials (PRCT's) and subsequent meta-analyses in many fields including nutrition and metabolism. These meta-analyses often yield convincing, contradictory or no proof of effectiveness. Consequently recommendations and guidelines of varying validity and quality have been published, often failing to convince the medical, insurance and government worlds to support nutritional care. Causes for lack of adequate proof of effectiveness are manifold. Many studies and meta-analyses lacked pathophysiological depth in design and interpretation. Study populations were not homogenous and endpoints not always clearly defined. Patients were included not at nutritional risk, unlikely to benefit from nutritional intervention. Others received nutrients in excess of requirements or tolerance due to organ failure. To include all available studies in a meta-analysis, study quality and homogeneity were only assessed on the basis of formal study design and outcome rather than on patient characteristics. Consequently, some studies showed benefit but included patients suffering harm, other studies were negative but contained patients that benefited. Recommendations did not always emphasize these shortcomings, confusing the medical and nutritional community and creating the impression that nutritional support is not beneficial. Strong reliance on meta-analyses and guidelines shifts the focus of education from studying clinical and nutritional physiology to memorizing guidelines. To prevent or improve malnutrition more physiological knowledge should be acquired to personalize nutritional practices and to more correctly value and evaluate the evidence. This also applies to the design and interpretation of PRCT's and meta-analyses.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Meta-analysis is not enough: The critical role of pathophysiology in determining optimal care in clinical nutrition

Popis výsledku anglicky

Evidence based medicine has preferably been based on prospective randomized controlled trials (PRCT's) and subsequent meta-analyses in many fields including nutrition and metabolism. These meta-analyses often yield convincing, contradictory or no proof of effectiveness. Consequently recommendations and guidelines of varying validity and quality have been published, often failing to convince the medical, insurance and government worlds to support nutritional care. Causes for lack of adequate proof of effectiveness are manifold. Many studies and meta-analyses lacked pathophysiological depth in design and interpretation. Study populations were not homogenous and endpoints not always clearly defined. Patients were included not at nutritional risk, unlikely to benefit from nutritional intervention. Others received nutrients in excess of requirements or tolerance due to organ failure. To include all available studies in a meta-analysis, study quality and homogeneity were only assessed on the basis of formal study design and outcome rather than on patient characteristics. Consequently, some studies showed benefit but included patients suffering harm, other studies were negative but contained patients that benefited. Recommendations did not always emphasize these shortcomings, confusing the medical and nutritional community and creating the impression that nutritional support is not beneficial. Strong reliance on meta-analyses and guidelines shifts the focus of education from studying clinical and nutritional physiology to memorizing guidelines. To prevent or improve malnutrition more physiological knowledge should be acquired to personalize nutritional practices and to more correctly value and evaluate the evidence. This also applies to the design and interpretation of PRCT's and meta-analyses.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

FB - Endokrinologie, diabetologie, metabolismus, výživa

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Clinical Nutrition

ISSN

0261-5614

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

35

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

3

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

10

Strana od-do

748-757

Kód UT WoS článku

000376814700028

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-84973473697