The STROBE extensions: protocol for a qualitative assessment of content and a survey of endorsement.

INTRODUCTION: The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement was developed in response to inadequate reporting of observational studies. In recent years, several extensions to STROBE have been created to provide more nuanced field-specific guidance for authors. The content and the prevalence of extension endorsement have not yet been assessed. Accordingly, there are two aims: (1) to classify changes made in the extensions to identify strengths and weaknesses of the original STROBE checklist and (2) to determine the prevalence and typology of endorsement by journals in fields related to extensions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two independent researchers will assess additions in each extension. Additions will be coded as 'field specific' (FS) or 'not field specific' (NFS). FS is defined as particularly relevant information for a single field and guidance provided generally cannot be extrapolated beyond that field. NFS is defined as information that reflects epidemiological or methodological tenets and can be generalised to most, if not all, types of observational research studies. Intraclass correlation will be calculated to measure reviewers' concordance. On disagreement, consensus will be sought. Individual additions will be grouped by STROBE checklist items to identify the frequency and distribution of changes.Journals in fields related to extensions will be identified through National Library of Medicine PubMed Broad Subject Terms, screened for eligibility and further distilled via Ovid MEDLINE® search strategies for observational studies. Text describing endorsement will be extracted from each journal's website. A classification scheme will be created for endorsement types and the prevalence of endorsement will be estimated. Analyses will use NVivo V.11 and SAS University Edition. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not require ethical approval as it does not involve human participants. This study has been preregistered on Open Science Framework.

Effectiveness and efficacy of nutritional therapy: A systematic review following Cochrane methodology.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Disease-related malnutrition has deleterious consequences on patients' outcome and healthcare costs. The demonstration of improved outcome by appropriate nutritional management is on occasion difficult. The European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) appointed the Nutrition Education Study Group (ESPEN-NESG) to increase recognition of nutritional knowledge and support in health services. METHODS: To obtain the best available evidence on the potential effects of malnutrition on morbidity, mortality and hospital stay; cost of malnutrition; effect of nutritional treatment on outcome parameters and pharmaco-economics of nutritional therapy, a systematic review of the literature was performed following Cochrane methodology, to answer the following key questions: Q1) Is malnutrition an independent predictive factor for readmission within 30 days from hospital discharge? Q2) Does nutritional therapy reduce the risk of readmission within 30 days from hospital discharge? Q3) Is nutritional therapy cost-effective/does it reduce costs in hospitalized patients? and Q4) Is nutritional therapy cost effective/does it reduce costs in outpatients? RESULTS: For Q1 six of 15 identified observational studies indicated that malnutrition was predictive of re-admissions, whereas the remainder did not. For Q2 nine randomized controlled trials and two meta-analyses gave non-conclusive results whether re-admissions could be reduced by nutritional therapy. Economic benefit and cost-effectiveness of nutritional therapy was consistently reported in 16 identified studies for hospitalized patients (Q3), whereas the heterogeneous and limited corresponding data on out-patients (Q4) indicated cost-benefits in some selected sub-groups. CONCLUSIONS: This result of this review supports the use of nutritional therapy to reduce healthcare costs, most evident from large, homogeneous studies. In general, reports are too heterogeneous and overall of limited quality for conclusions on impact of malnutrition and its treatment on readmissions.