ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2023
Prognostic performance of the NRS2002, NUTRIC, and modified NUTRIC to identify high nutritional risk in severe acute pancreatitis patients.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between the geriatric nutritional risk index and all-cause mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis in the intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The Relationship Between PANC-3 Score and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 Score in Patients with Acute Pancreatitis.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Observational
- Dynamics of in-hospital body composition changes in mild and moderately severe acute pancreatitis: trajectories and predictors.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Association between a high Modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill score and 30-day mortality in critically ill adults: A retrospective cohort study.Irish journal of medical science · 2025Article
- Bayesian Analysis of Modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) Score for Mortality Prediction in Critically Ill Patients.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025Article
- Diagnostic consistency of GLIM criteria and PG-SGA for malnutrition in patients with pancreatic cancer.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Modified NUTRIC Score as a Predictor of All-cause Mortality in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024Article
- Survey on Nutrition in Neurological Intensive Care Units (SONNIC)-A Cross-Sectional Survey among German-Speaking Neurointensivists on Medical Nutritional Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is the most common gastrointestinal disease requiring hospital admission. AP patients are categorized as mild, moderately severe, and severe AP (SAP). For SAP patients, malnutrition increases susceptibility to infection and mortality. The Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002), the Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (NUTRIC) score and modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) are nutritional risk screening tools of critically ill patients and have not been validated in patients with SAP. It is essential to evaluate the prognostic performance of these nutritional risk screening tools. Materials and methods: A retrospective study was designed to validate the NRS 2002, NUTRIC, and mNUTRIC when applied to SAP patients. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted to investigate the predictive ability of clinical outcomes by comparing areas under the curve (AUC). Appropriate cut-offs were calculated by using Youden's index. Patients were identified as being at high nutritional risk according to the calculated cut-off values. The effects of different scoring systems on mortalities were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between the energy provision and 28-day mortality. Results: From January 2013 to December 2019, 234 SAP patients were included and analyzed. Patients categorized as high nutritional risk by the NRS 2002 (12.6% versus 1.9% for 28-day and 20.5% versus 3.7% for 90-day), NUTRIC (16.2% versus 0.0% for 28-day and 27.0% versus 0.0% for 90-day), and mNUTRIC (16.4% versus 0.0% for 28-day and 26.4% versus 0.8% for 90-day) had significant higher mortality than those categorized as low nutritional risk. The NUTRIC (AUC: 0.861 for 28-day mortality and 0.871 for 90-day mortality, both cut-off value ≥3) and mNUTRIC (AUC: 0.838 for 28-day and 0.828 for 90-day mortality, both cut-off value ≥3) showed better predictive ability of the 28- and 90-day mortality than the NRS 2002 (AUC: 0.706 for 28-day mortality and 0.695 for 90-day mortality, both cut-off value ≥5). Conclusion: The NRS 2002, NUTRIC, and mNUTRIC scores were predictors for the 28- and 90-day mortalities. The NUTRIC and mNUTRIC showed better predictive ability compared with the NRS 2002 when applied to SAP patients.
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.