ReviewBMC health services research2021
Identification of nutritional risk in the acute care setting: progress towards a practice and evidence informed systems level approach.
Review in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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 · 2025Article
- Using a multi-stakeholder co-design process to develop a health service organisation-wide patient reported outcome measure collection system.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Correction to: Identification of nutritional risk in the acute care setting: progress towards a practice and evidence informed systems level approach.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Instruments to identify risk factors associated with adverse childhood experiences for vulnerable children in primary care in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo improve nutritional assessment and care pathways in the acute care setting, it is important to understand the indicators that may predict nutritional risk. Informed by a review of systematic reviews, this project engaged stakeholders to prioritise and reach consensus on a list of evidence based and clinically contextualised indicators for identifying malnutrition risk in the acute care setting.
methodsA modified Delphi approach was employed which consisted of four rounds of consultation with 54 stakeholders and 10 experts to reach consensus and refine a list of 57 risk indicators identified from a review of systematic reviews. Weighted mean and variance scores for each indicator were evaluated. Consistency was tested with intra class correlation coefficient. Cronbach's alpha was used to determine the reliability of the indicators. The final list of indicators was subject to Cronbach's alpha and exploratory principal component analysis.
resultsFifteen indicators were considered to be the most important in identifying nutritional risk. These included difficulty self-feeding, polypharmacy, surgery and impaired gastro-intestinal function. There was 82% agreement for the final 15 indicators that they collectively would predict malnutrition risk in hospital inpatients.
conclusionThe 15 indicators identified are supported by evidence and are clinically informed. This represents an opportunity for translation into a novel and automated systems level approach for identifying malnutrition risk in the acute care setting.
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.