Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33654405›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2021

Multidisciplinary Provision of Food and Nutritional Care to Hospitalized Adult In-Patients: A Scoping Review.

Gladys Yinusa, Janet Scammell, Jane Murphy, Gráinne Ford, Sue Baron

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Effect of dietitian-guided nutritional support on intensive care units length of stay and nutritional risk in critically Ill patients.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Exploring Patient Mealtime Experience in an Acute Care Setting Using the Modified Austin Health Patient Mealtime Experience Tool.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors.

Gladys YinusaDepartment of Nursing Science, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, Dorset, UK.
Janet ScammellDepartment of Nursing Science, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, Dorset, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8489-239X
Jane MurphyAgeing and Dementia Research Centre, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, Dorset, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3531-5566
Gráinne FordDietetic Department, The Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bournemouth, Dorset, UK.
Sue BaronDepartment of Nursing Science, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, Dorset, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5977-599X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMultidisciplinary approaches to nutritional care are increasingly emphasized and recommended. However, there is little evidence of how different disciplines work together collaboratively to deliver optimum quality care to adult in-patients. This scoping review aimed to describe the existing literature on multidisciplinary collaboration to identify the various disciplines involved and the features that influence collaborative working in implementing multidisciplinary food and nutritional care with adult in-patients.

methodsMultiple databases were searched, including MEDLINE Complete, Embase, CINAHL Complete, HMIC, and Scopus, from their inception to December 2019. Data were retrieved from eligible studies. A narrative description of findings is reported with respect to the disciplines involved, the aspects of nutritional care explored, and the collaborative processes categorized using the input, process, and outcome framework.

resultsThirty-one studies with heterogeneous study designs met the eligibility criteria. Studies were undertaken in six countries. Findings show a wide diversity of multidisciplinary collaborations in various aspects of nutritional care in all studies. Multidisciplinary nutritional care provision was facilitated by several processes, including training and development, communication and information sharing, and clinical leadership and management support. Outcomes were reported at the patient, team, and organizational levels.

conclusionThis review reveals the significance of the interrelationship between different disciplines and their complementary contributions towards the delivery of optimal food and nutritional care. Key aspects include the involvement of different disciplines, the clarification of roles and multidisciplinary interrelationships, communication, information sharing, clinical leadership, and management support, all of which facilitated collaborative working. Our review uncovered that these features can significantly influence multidisciplinary working. This review is the first to present literature concerning the attributes that affect collaborative working. Further research is recommended specifically around multidisciplinary nutritional care processes and conditions that allow for better collaborative working.

Indexed as

adult in-patienthospitalmalnutritionmultidisciplinary carenutritional care

Identifiers

PMID33654405
PMCPMC7910096

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.