Chen 2000b.

Methods	Randomised clinical trial, China
Participants	30 hospitalised adults undergoing moderate or more elective abdominal surgery, at nutritional risk due to abdominal surgery Male:Female = 17:13 Exclusion criteria: Metabolic and infectious diseases, having taken steroids or immunosuppressive agents or both recently
Interventions	Experimental group A: Enteral nutrition, Nutrison (product of Holland Nutricia company) were infused through a nutrition tube in upper jejunum on the 1st postoperative day, 1/3 of the total amount on the 1st day, 2/3 on the 2nd day, and full amount (125.4 KJ‐1·kg‐1·d‐1) on the 3rd day(n = 10) Experimental group B: Parenteral nutrition (Huarui company products) through peripheral or central vein from the 1st postoperative day, with the same usage of enteral nutrition group(n = 10) Control group: Conventional infusion for 8 days, the average calorie intake was about 2514 KJ·d‐1(n = 10)
Outcomes	Complications, plasma protein (total protein, albumin and transferrin), CD3, CD4, CD8, D4/CD8.
Study dates	Not stated
Notes	Same trial as Chen 2000a. We tried but failed to contact the author by phone (0543‐3258597).
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The trial was described as being randomised, but it was unclear how the sequence was generated.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The trial was described as being randomised, but it was unclear how the allocation was concealed.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Participants and personnel were not blinded.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The procedure of blinding was insufficiently described.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The numbers and reasons for withdrawals and dropouts were not clearly stated.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No protocol could be obtained and the trial did not report on all‐cause mortality.
For‐profit bias	Unclear risk	It was unclear how the trial was funded.
Other bias	Low risk	The trial appeared to be free of other components that could put it at risk of bias.