Smith 1985.
Methods | Randomised clinical trial, Australia | |
Participants | 50 hospitalised adults with gastro‐intestinal tract malignancy scheduled for surgical treatment, at nutritional risk due to undergoing major surgery Male:Female = 34:16 Mean age = 65 years Exclusion criteria: emergency cases, people with peritonitis or bowel obstruction |
|
Interventions | Experimental group: enteral nutrition (Isocal) containing 34 g protein, 44 g fat and 133 g glucose a litre (n = 25)
Control group: no intervention(n = 25) Co‐intervention: intravenous isotonic fluids and standard hospital diet |
|
Outcomes | Mortality, complications, length of hospital stay | |
Study dates | January 1981 to June 1983 | |
Notes | We could obtain no contact information for the authors. | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Randomly‐ordered cards |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Sealed envelopes but it was unclear if they were opaque. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Not described |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Not described |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | It was unclear how many participants had incomplete outcome data. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | The trial reported mortality and complications. |
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. |