Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35832095›Full record

ArticleGerontology & geriatric medicine

Validity of the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool for Evaluation of Frailty Status in Older Hospitalised Patients.

Yogesh Sharma, Peter Avina, Emelie Ross, Chris Horwood, Paul Hakendorf, Campbell Thompson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gerontology & geriatric medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Addressing Malnutrition in Australian Hospitals: A Scoping Review to Inform Systems Thinking.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors.

Yogesh SharmaCollege of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7716-2599
Peter AvinaQueen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Emelie RossFlinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Chris HorwoodFlinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Paul HakendorfFlinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Campbell ThompsonThe University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The malnutrition-universal-screening-tool (MUST) is commonly used for screening malnutrition in hospitalised patients but its utility in the detection of frailty is unknown. This study determined the utility of MUST in detection of frailty in older hospitalised patients. This prospective-study enrolled 243 patients ⩾65 years in a tertiary-teaching hospital in Australia. Patients with a MUST score of ⩾1 were classified as at-risk of malnutrition. Frailty status was determined by the Edmonton-Frail-Scale (EFS) and patients with an EFS score of >8 were classified as frail. We validated the MUST against the EFS by plotting a receiver-operating-characteristic-curve (ROC) curve and area-under-the-curve (AUC) was determined. The mean (SD) age was 83.9 (6.5) years and 126 (51.8%) were females. The EFS determined 149 (61.3%) patients as frail, while 107 (44.1%) patients were at-risk of malnutrition according to the MUST. There was a positive linear but weak association between the MUST and the EFS scores (Pearson's correlation coefficient= .22, 95% CI .12- .36,

Indexed as

agingclinical geriatricsfrailtygerontologyhealth services researchobservational study

Identifiers

PMID35832095
PMCPMC9272176

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.