Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33803339›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Approaches to Nutritional Screening in Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Amira Mohammed Ali, Hiroshi Kunugi

Open access · goldAbstract readCase ReportsReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Osteosarcopenia and Long-COVID: a dangerous combination.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2022
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Amira Mohammed AliNational Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Department of Mental Disorder Research, National Institute of Neuroscience, Tokyo 187-0031, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6448-8282
Hiroshi KunugiNational Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Department of Mental Disorder Research, National Institute of Neuroscience, Tokyo 187-0031, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7209-3790
National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry · JP

Funding

Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development 18dm0107100h0003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Malnutrition is common among severe patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), mainly elderly adults and patients with comorbidities. It is also associated with atypical presentation of the disease. Despite the possible contribution of malnutrition to the acquisition and severity of COVID-19, it is not clear which nutritional screening measures may best diagnose malnutrition in these patients at early stages. This is of crucial importance given the urgency and rapid progression of the disease in vulnerable groups. Accordingly, this review examines the available literature for different nutritional screening approaches implemented among COVID-19 patients, with a special focus on elderly adults. After a literature search, we selected and scrutinized 14 studies assessing malnutrition among COVID-19 patients. The Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) has demonstrated superior sensitivity to other traditional screening measures. The controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score, which comprises serum albumin level, cholesterol level, and lymphocytes count, as well as a combined CONUT-lactate dehydrogenase-C-reactive protein score expressed a predictive capacity even superior to that of NRS-2002 (0.81% and 0.92% vs. 0.79%) in midlife and elder COVID-19 patients. Therefore, simple measures based on routinely conducted laboratory investigations such as the CONUT score may be timely, cheap, and valuable alternatives for identifying COVID-19 patients with high nutritional risk. Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) was the only measure used to detect residual malnutrition and high malnutrition risk in remitting patients-MNA scores correlated with hypoalbuminemia, hypercytokinemia, and weight loss. Older males with severe inflammation, gastrointestinal symptoms, and pre-existing comorbidities (diabetes, obesity, or hypertension) are more prone to malnutrition and subsequently poor COVID-19 prognosis both during the acute phase and during convalescence. Thus, they are in need of frequent nutritional monitoring and support while detecting and treating malnutrition in the general public might be necessary to increase resilience against COVID-19.

Indexed as

COVID-19MalnutritionAdultAgedGeriatric AssessmentHumansMaleNutritional StatusNutrition AssessmentRisk AssessmentSARS-CoV-2aging/age-related non-communicable diseasesanemia/ferritincoronavirus disease 2019/COVID-19cytokine stormmalnutrition/nutritional deficienciesmicronutrientsNutrition Risk Screening 2002older adults/elderlyseleniumthe controlling nutritional status score/CONUT scorevitamin D

Identifiers

PMID33803339
PMCPMC7967488
OpenAlexW3135093856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.