For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
3
views
26
references
 Top references
cited by
1
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      575
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Efficacy of alanyl glutamine in nutritional support therapy for patients with sepsis : A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

      review-article
      Author(s): , MM, , MM, , MM, , MB ∗
      Publication date (Electronic):
      Journal: Medicine
      Publisher: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
      Keywords: Alanyl glutamine, nutritional support, protocol, sepsis, systematic review

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          Sepsis is a systemic inflammatory response caused by infection, which is a common complication after severe infection, trauma, shock, and surgery, and is also an important factor in inducing septic shock and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), and has become one of the important causes of death in critically ill patients. Septic patients with gastrointestinal transport function weakened, are prone to malnutrition, resulting in decreased immune function, thereby affecting the therapeutic effect. Clinical practice shows that the nutritional metabolism and immune response of patients with sepsis can be effectively improved by giving alanyl glutamine nutritional support treatment, but there is no evidence of evidence-based medicine. The study carried out in this protocol aims to evaluate the effectiveness of alanyl glutamine in nutritional support therapy for patients with sepsis.

          Methods:

          The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, CNKI, CBM, VIP, and Wanfang databases were searched by computer, to retrieve all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on nutritional support for the treatment of sepsis with alanyl glutamine from the date of database establishment to December 2020. Two researchers independently selected the study, extracted and managed the data. RevMan5.3 software was used to analyze the included literature.

          Results:

          This study observed the changes of serum albumin (ALB), prealbumin (PAB), hemoglobin (Hb), C-reactive protein (CRP), immunoglobulin (IgG, IgA, and IgM), APACHE II score before and after treatment to evaluate the efficacy of alanyl glutamine in nutritional support therapy for patients with sepsis.

          Conclusion:

          This study will provide reliable evidence for the application of alanyl glutamine in nutritional support therapy for patients with sepsis.

          OSF Registration number:

          DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/VRZPJ.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3).

          Mervyn Singer, Clifford S Deutschman, Christopher Warren Seymour … (2016)
          Definitions of sepsis and septic shock were last revised in 2001. Considerable advances have since been made into the pathobiology (changes in organ function, morphology, cell biology, biochemistry, immunology, and circulation), management, and epidemiology of sepsis, suggesting the need for reexamination.
          Article 0 comments Cited 5745 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

            Julian P T Higgins, Simon G Thompson (2002)
            The extent of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis partly determines the difficulty in drawing overall conclusions. This extent may be measured by estimating a between-study variance, but interpretation is then specific to a particular treatment effect metric. A test for the existence of heterogeneity exists, but depends on the number of studies in the meta-analysis. We develop measures of the impact of heterogeneity on a meta-analysis, from mathematical criteria, that are independent of the number of studies and the treatment effect metric. We derive and propose three suitable statistics: H is the square root of the chi2 heterogeneity statistic divided by its degrees of freedom; R is the ratio of the standard error of the underlying mean from a random effects meta-analysis to the standard error of a fixed effect meta-analytic estimate, and I2 is a transformation of (H) that describes the proportion of total variation in study estimates that is due to heterogeneity. We discuss interpretation, interval estimates and other properties of these measures and examine them in five example data sets showing different amounts of heterogeneity. We conclude that H and I2, which can usually be calculated for published meta-analyses, are particularly useful summaries of the impact of heterogeneity. One or both should be presented in published meta-analyses in preference to the test for heterogeneity. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
            Article 0 comments Cited 5470 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

              David Atkins, Dana Best, Peter A Briss … (2004)
              Users of clinical practice guidelines and other recommendations need to know how much confidence they can place in the recommendations. Systematic and explicit methods of making judgments can reduce errors and improve communication. We have developed a system for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations that can be applied across a wide range of interventions and contexts. In this article we present a summary of our approach from the perspective of a guideline user. Judgments about the strength of a recommendation require consideration of the balance between benefits and harms, the quality of the evidence, translation of the evidence into specific circumstances, and the certainty of the baseline risk. It is also important to consider costs (resource utilisation) before making a recommendation. Inconsistencies among systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations reduce their potential to facilitate critical appraisal and improve communication of these judgments. Our system for guiding these complex judgments balances the need for simplicity with the need for full and transparent consideration of all important issues.
              Article 0 comments Cited 1101 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Medicine (Baltimore)
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Medicine (Baltimore)
                Journal ID (publisher-id): MEDI
                Title: Medicine
                Publisher: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Hagerstown, MD )
                ISSN (Print): 0025-7974
                ISSN (Electronic): 1536-5964
                Publication date Collection: 19 March 2021
                Publication date (Electronic): 19 March 2021
                Volume: 100
                Issue: 11
                Electronic Location Identifier: e24861
                Affiliations
                Dalian Municipal Central Hospital, Dalian, Liaoning Province, China.
                Author notes
                [∗ ]Correspondence: Shiquan Han, Dalian Municipal Central Hospital, No.826 Southwest Road, Shahekou District, Dalian 116033, Liaoning Province, China (e-mail: eastsun0427@ 123456163.com ).
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0646-5653
                Article
                Publisher ID: MD-D-21-00811 Accession ID: 24861
                DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024861
                PMC ID: 7982144
                PubMed ID: 33725958
                SO-VID: 54385378-c59d-4a44-9364-7b4d6f952758
                Copyright © Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
                License:

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

                History
                Date received : 28 January 2021
                Date accepted : 29 January 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: the Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province
                Award ID: No.2019-ZD-0302
                Award Recipient : Xiaolei Su
                Categories
                Subject: 3900
                Subject: Research Article
                Subject: Study Protocol Systematic Review
                Custom metadata
                OPEN-ACCESS TRUE

                Keywords: alanyl glutamine,nutritional support,protocol,sepsis,systematic review
                Data availability:
                Keywords: alanyl glutamine, nutritional support, protocol, sepsis, systematic review

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content575

                See all similar

                Cited by1

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors623

                See all reference authors