L-glutamine/Finding
One finding, on its own
A single claim from the graph, with the evidence strength computed from its study, the sentence it was drawn from, and the paper. This address does not change.
No detected effect on infectious complication rate
ModerateEvidence strength: moderate. Human evidence with one recorded weakness, or capped at moderate by its design or by unread numbers.FindingNull resultreplicated ×2“When the four studies in which the researchers reported infectious complications were aggregated, enteral GLN supplementation was not associated with a reduction in infectious complications (RR 0.93, 95 % CI 0.79–1.10, p =0.39; heterogeneity I2 = 0 %) (Fig..”
Quoted verbatim from Enteral glutamine supplementation in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. - Study
- meta-analysis
- Participants
- 776
- Population
- Adult critically ill ICU patients given enteral glutamine against an isonitrogenous control; secondary endpoint (primary was hospital mortality); 4 pooled trials; infection defined by each source trial
Effect 0.93 risk ratio, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.1
Enteral glutamine supplementation in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.2015PMID:26283217Permalink
Keep reading
- Everything the graph holds on L-glutamine
- Every compound studied against Infectious complication rate
- How to read the evidence strength and the marks
To cite this finding: https://catalystproject.ai/e/01M0ZG9SVAX1EH9WV09D9Q20RR