CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 183Clinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyNutrition and Health in AgingDialysis and Renal Disease Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of oral nutritional supplements on hospital readmissions

Stratton, Rebecca J., Hébuterne, X., Elia, M.·2013·Ageing Research Reviews
DOI 10.1016/j.arr.2013.07.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The adverse effects of disease-related malnutrition (DRM) on health care use and costs are well substantiated. However, the impact of managing DRM with nutritional support on health care use, including hospital (re)admissions requires exploration. This systematic review (9 RCT, N=1190) examined the effects of oral nutritional supplements (ONS) on hospital (re)admissions. Meta-analysis of 6 RCT (N=852) with data on the proportion of patients (re)admitted to hospital showed significant reductions with ONS vs. routine care (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.80, P=0.001), including 5 RCT (N=826) that recorded readmissions (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.80, P=0.001). The significant reduction in (re)admissions was found in meta-analyses of ONS trials in various settings and in patients with DRM or of varied nutritional status. A larger meta-analysis (8 RCT, N=999) that combined other (re)admissions data using standardised differences also showed a significant reduction with ONS (effect size -0.23, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.10, P=0.001). Most of these trials (75%) were in older people aged ≥65 years (6 RCT, N=834, effect size -0.18, 95% CI -0.31 to -0.04, P=0.011). This systematic review shows that ONS significantly reduce hospital (re)admissions, particularly in older patient groups, with economic implications for health care.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.arr.2013.07.002

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 38 references

1 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–183 of 183

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Stratton, R. J., Hébuterne, X., & Elia, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (FR)
Corresponding author
Stratton, Rebecca J.
ORCID
Venue
Ageing Research Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-09
Volume
12
Issue
4
Pages
884-897
ISSN
1568-1637 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.arr.2013.07.002
OpenAlex
W1993654396
Cited by
183
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 12
FWCI
1.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Ageing Research Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Javna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RS
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
Keywords
oral nutritional supplements, disease-related malnutrition, hospital readmission, nutritional support, older adults, health care utilization, health care costs
MeSH terms
Administration, Oral, Aged, Humans, Nutritional Status, Patient Readmission, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Dietary Supplements, Malnutrition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review