↓ Skip to main content

Pre-operative oral nutritional supplementation with dietary advice versus dietary advice alone in weight-losing patients with colorectal cancer: single-blind randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 183)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pre-operative oral nutritional supplementation with dietary advice versus dietary advice alone in weight-losing patients with colorectal cancer: single-blind randomized controlled trial
Published in
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle, January 2017
DOI 10.1002/jcsm.12170
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sorrel T. Burden, Debra J. Gibson, Simon Lal, James Hill, Mark Pilling, Mattias Soop, Aswatha Ramesh, Chris Todd

Abstract

Pre-operative weight loss has been consistently associated with increased post-operative morbidity. The study aims to determine if pre-operative oral nutritional supplements (ONSs) with dietary advice reduce post-operative complications. Single-blinded randomized controlled trial. People with colorectal cancer scheduled for surgery with pre-operative weight loss >1 kg/3-6 months were randomized by using stratified blocks (1:1 ratio) in six hospitals (1 November 2013-28 February 2015). Intervention group was given 250 mL/day ONS (10.1 KJ and 0.096 g protein per mL) and dietary advice. Control group received dietary advice alone. Oral nutritional supplements were administered from diagnosis to the day preceding surgery. Research team was masked to group allocation. Primary outcome was patients with one or more surgical site infection (SSI) or chest infection; secondary outcomes included percentage weight loss, total complications, and body composition measurements. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed with both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. A sample size of 88 was required. Of 101 participants, (55 ONS, 46 controls) 97 had surgery. In intention-to-treat analysis, there were 21/45 (47%) patients with an infection-either an SSI or chest infection in the control group vs. 17/55 (30%) in the ONS group. The odds ratio of a patient incurring either an SSI or chest infection was 0.532 (P = 0.135 confidence interval 0.232 to 1.218) in the unadjusted analysis and when adjusted for random differences at baseline (age, gender, percentage weight loss, and cancer staging) was 0.341 (P = 0.031, confidence interval 0.128 to 0.909). Pre-operative percentage weight loss at the first time point after randomization was 4.1% [interquartile range (IQR) 1.7-7.0] in ONS group vs. 6.7% (IQR 2.6-10.8) in controls (Mann-Whitney U P = 0.021) and post-operatively was 7.4% (IQR 4.3-10.0) in ONS group vs. 10.2% (IQR 5.1-18.5) in controls (P = 0.016). Compared with dietary advice alone, ONS resulted in patients having fewer infections and less weight loss following surgery for colorectal cancer. We have demonstrated that pre-operative oral nutritional supplementation can improve clinical outcome in weight losing patients with colorectal cancer.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 16 20%
Student > Master 16 20%
Researcher 15 19%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 19 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 25 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 30%
Unspecified 20 25%
Mathematics 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2019.
All research outputs
#1,172,777
of 13,583,919 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
#46
of 183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,534
of 373,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,583,919 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 373,977 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them