Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31485981›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2020

Late referral of cancer patients with malnutrition to dietitians: a prospective study of clinical practice.

Cliona M Lorton, O Griffin, K Higgins, F Roulston, G Stewart, N Gough, E Barnes, A Aktas, T D Walsh

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. The roles of the dietitian in an 18-week telephone and mobile application nutrition intervention for upper gastrointestinal cancer: a qualitative analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Nutritional Risk and Unmet Nutritional Need in Ambulatory Patients Undergoing Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapies.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026
    Observational
  7. Article
  8. Barriers to timely nutrition support in patients with cancer: A scoping review.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Impact of COVID-19 on early identification of protein-energy malnutrition in the cancer care setting: a repeated cross-sectional survey of cancer care professionals.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Treatment barriers among patients with cancer cachexia.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Documentation of anthropometrics in people with cancer: a cross-site collaboration audit in four hospital settings in the UK.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  18. Adopting a systems-thinking approach to optimise dietary and exercise referral practices for cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Cliona M LortonAcademic Department of Palliative Medicine, Our Lady's Hospice & Care Services, Harold's Cross, Dublin, D6W EV82, Ireland. clorton@olh.ie.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0503-2795
O GriffinTrinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
K HigginsTallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
F RoulstonSt Luke's Radiation Oncology Network, Dublin, Ireland.
G StewartSt Vincent's Private Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
N GoughMater Private Mid-Western Radiation Oncology Centre, Limerick, Ireland.
E BarnesSt Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
A AktasDepartment of Supportive Oncology, Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3631-7563
T D WalshAcademic Department of Palliative Medicine, Our Lady's Hospice & Care Services, Harold's Cross, Dublin, D6W EV82, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9310-1729
St. Vincent's University Hospital · IETrinity College Dublin · IELevine Cancer Institute · USNenagh Hospital · IETallaght University Hospital · IEUniversity College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMalnutrition (MN) in cancer is common but underdiagnosed. Dietitian referrals may not occur until MN is established. We investigated cancer patient characteristics (demographics, nutritional status, and nutrition barriers) on referral to oncology dietitians. We also examined referral practices and prevalence of missed referral opportunities.

methodsThis was a naturalistic multi-site study of clinical practice. Data from consecutive referrals were collected in inpatient and outpatient settings. Demographics, nutritional status (weight, body mass index (BMI), weight loss in the preceding 3-6 months, oral intake, nutrition barriers), referral reasons, and use of screening were recorded. Missed opportunities for earlier referral were also noted.

resultsTwo hundred patients were included (60% male, 51% inpatients). Half had gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary cancers. The majority were on antitumor treatment. Two-thirds had lost ≥ 5% body weight. Forty percent were overweight or obese. Seventy percent had ≥ 2 nutritional barriers. Most common nutrition barriers were anorexia, nausea, and early satiety. Greater weight loss and lower food intake were associated with ≥ 2 barriers. Weight loss was the most common referral reason. Screening was used in 35%. Referrals should have occurred sooner in nearly half (45%, n = 89).

conclusionsCancer patients were referred late to a dietitian, with multiple nutritional barriers. Most referrals were for established weight loss (WL). WL may be masked by pre-existing obesity. Almost half had missed earlier referral opportunities; screening was infrequent. Over one-quarter should have been re-referred sooner. There is a clear need for clinician education. Future research should investigate the optimal timing of dietitian referral and the best nutrition screening tools for use in cancer.

Indexed as

AdultBody Mass IndexFemaleHumansMaleMalnutritionMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNauseaNeoplasmsNutritional StatusNutritionistsObesityOutpatientsPractice Patterns, Physicians'PrevalenceCancerDietitianMalnutritionReferralSymptomsWeight loss

Identifiers

PMID31485981
OpenAlexW2971851579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.