Guy 1995

Methods	Randomised trial comparing enteral nutrition to no enteral nutrition in patients hospitalized awaiting liver transplant. Geographical location: New York, New York, USA. Abstract published 1995.
Participants	Inclusion criteria: Hospitalized patients awaiting liver transplantation > 18 years. Exclusion criteria: Hospitalized in ICU, grade 4 hepatic encephalopathy, infections precluding transplantation. 42 hospitalized patients (no data regarding sex or age; 10 dropped out).
Interventions	Intervention group received enteral nutrition through nasogastric tube (Commercial formulation [Impact®]) + unrestricted oral diet prior to transplant; Control group given unrestricted oral diet. Mean duration of therapy at least 5 days (excluded if fewer days).
Outcomes	Hepatic encephalopathy.
Category of study	Enteral nutrition/Medical.
Sample size calculation	Not reported if done.
Full paper or abstract only	Abstract.
Notes	Randomised patients who received transplant within 5 days were excluded from analysis. Data obtained from author at poster. Request for further information sent via US mail on September 16, 2011 to senior author, Dr Miller, as Dr Guy could not be located. (Charles Miller, MD, Transplantation Center, Director, Cleveland Clinic Main Campus, Mail Code A80, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195). Dr Miller responded on September 24, 2011; he had no information but suggested that we try to contact Dr Steve Guy at Hahneman. A search for a Dr Stephen Guy turned up the following address: Stephen Guy, MD, Drexel Transplant Associates, 216 N. Broad Street, Feinstein Building, 5th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19102 and letter sent to him on September 26, 2011. No response has been received as of March 20, 2012.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Only states "prospective randomised trial".
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No details.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not blinded.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	10 dropouts (unknown how many from each group nor reasons for all of them, although at least some probably had transplant within 5 days of randomisation).
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	No mortality data provided.
Other bias	Unclear risk	Funding source not identified.
Intent to treat analysis	High risk	Could not be done.
Baseline imbalance?	Low risk	Although no numbers were presented, poster stated that there were no differences.
Early stopping?	Unclear risk	No sample size calculation and unknown why stopped.