ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Item Generation in the Development of an Interactive Nutrition Specific Physical Exam Competency Tool (INSPECT): A Qualitative Study Utilizing Technology-Based Focus Groups in the United States.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond Body Condition Score: A Proposed Interspecies Framework for Tissue-by-Tissue Nutritional Assessment in Veterinary Practice.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Item-Level Analysis of a Newly Developed Interactive Nutrition Specific Physical Exam Competency Tool (INSPECT) Using the Rasch Measurement Model.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Inter-Rater and Intra-Rater Reliability of the INSPECT (Interactive Nutrition Specific Physical Exam Competency Tool) Measured in Multi-Site Acute Care Settings.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Content and Face Validation of a Novel, Interactive Nutrition Specific Physical Exam Competency Tool (INSPECT) to Evaluate Registered Dietitians' Competence: A Delphi Consensus from the United States.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An alarming 30% to 50% prevalence rate of disease-related malnutrition among hospitalized patients compels the need for early diagnosis and treatment of malnutrition. Registered Dietitian Nutritionists (RDNs) can utilize the nutrition-focused physical examination (NFPE) as one of the nutrition assessment criteria to accurately diagnose malnutrition. Although RDNs are striving to employ NFPE in practice, a lack of experience and adequate training impedes full utilization of this technique. This results in wide skill variations requiring continuous evaluation of RDNs' NFPE competency. However, a standardized, validated competency tool is not widely available and hence this study aims to develop a standardized, interactive nutrition-specific physical exam competency tool (INSPECT). As a first step in the development of INSPECT, a qualitative, technology-based focus group approach with 7 content and practice experts was utilized to generate appropriate tool items. A total of 70 NFPE items under 9 areas including 12 items for muscle loss, 4 items for subcutaneous fat loss, 31 items for micronutrient deficiencies, 1 item for fluid status, 2 items for handgrip strength, 5 items for initial preparation, 4 items for bedside manner, 8 items for swallowing, and 3 items for abdominal evaluation were generated. This study successfully utilized technology-based focus groups to generate appropriate NFPE items for the competency tool development. Using the items, an initial version of INSPECT has been developed, which is presently being investigated for content and face validity. The final version will undergo field tests and will be examined for reliability, validity, and item-level psychometric properties.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.