Cited by 221Clinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyDysphagia Assessment and ManagementAcute Ischemic Stroke Management

Routine oral nutritional supplementation for stroke patients in hospital (FOOD): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Martin S. Dennis, Steff C. Lewis, Charles P Warlow·2005·The Lancet

Abstract

Background Undernutrition is common in hospital patients with stroke, can develop or worsen in hospital, and is associated with poor outcomes. We aimed to establish whether routine oral nutritional supplements improve outcome after stroke. Methods The FOOD trials are a family of three pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trials. We measured the outcomes of stroke patients who could swallow and who were randomly allocated normal hospital diet or normal hospital diet plus oral nutritional supplements until hospital discharge. The primary outcome was death or poor outcome (modified Rankin scale [MRS] grade 3-5), 6 months after enrollment, measured unaware of treatment allocation. Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings Between Nov 1, 1996, and July 31, 2003, 4023 patients were enrolled by 125 hospitals in 15 countries. Only 314 (8%) patients were judged to be undernourished at baseline. Vital status and MRS at the end of the trial were known for 4012 and 4004 patients, respectively. Supplemented diet was associated with an absolute reduction in risk of death of 0.7% (95% CI -1.4 to 2.7) and an increased risk of death or poor outcome of 0.7% (-2.3 to 3.8). Interpretation We could not confirm the anticipated 4% absolute benefit for death or poor outcome from routine oral nutritional supplements for mainly well nourished stroke patients in hospital. Our results would be compatible with a 1% or 2% absolute benefit or harm from oral supplements. These results do not sup…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(05)17982-3

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dennis, M. S., Lewis, S. C., & Warlow, C. P.
Affiliations
Western General Hospital (GB)
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-02
Volume
365
Issue
9461
Pages
755-763
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W1477045134
Cited by
221
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 5
FWCI
17.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (96/29/01)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Dysphagia Assessment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
Keywords
stroke, oral nutritional supplementation, malnutrition, hospitalized patients, modified Rankin Scale, mortality, functional outcome, hospital food
MeSH terms
Aged, Energy Intake, Dietary Proteins, Eating, Female, Humans, Male, Prognosis, Survival Rate, Treatment Outcome, Dietary Supplements, Stroke, 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