ArticleJMIR formative research2023
Implementing a Machine Learning Screening Tool for Malnutrition: Insights From Qualitative Research Applicable to Other Machine Learning-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Malnutrition in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence in Malnutrition: A Systematic Literature Review.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Factors Affecting Utilization of Decision Support Systems: The Interplay Between Technology, Users, and the Healthcare Environment.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Framework for artificial intelligence implementation research in healthcare: synthesizing current evidence on barriers and facilitators.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Explainable AI in hospital clinical decision support systems: A scoping review of healthcare professionals' perspectives.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Predictive ability of malnutrition screening tools in enterally fed, mechanically ventilated patients with phase angle inference: A prospective observational study.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2026Article
- From theoretical models to practical deployment: A perspective and case study of opportunities and challenges in AI-driven cardiac auscultation research for low-income settings.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Role of artificial intelligence in critical care nutrition support and research.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMachine learning (ML)-based clinical decision support systems (CDSS) are popular in clinical practice settings but are often criticized for being limited in usability, interpretability, and effectiveness. Evaluating the implementation of ML-based CDSS is critical to ensure CDSS is acceptable and useful to clinicians and helps them deliver high-quality health care. Malnutrition is a common and underdiagnosed condition among hospital patients, which can have serious adverse impacts. Early identification and treatment of malnutrition are important.
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the implementation of an ML tool, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST)-Plus, that predicts hospital patients at high risk for malnutrition and identify best implementation practices applicable to this and other ML-based CDSS.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative postimplementation evaluation using in-depth interviews with registered dietitians (RDs) who use MUST-Plus output in their everyday work. After coding the data, we mapped emergent themes onto select domains of the nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability (NASSS) framework.
resultsWe interviewed 17 of the 24 RDs approached (71%), representing 37% of those who use MUST-Plus output. Several themes emerged: (1) enhancements to the tool were made to improve accuracy and usability; (2) MUST-Plus helped identify patients that would not otherwise be seen; perceived usefulness was highest in the original site; (3) perceived accuracy varied by respondent and site; (4) RDs valued autonomy in prioritizing patients; (5) depth of tool understanding varied by hospital and level; (6) MUST-Plus was integrated into workflows and electronic health records; and (7) RDs expressed a desire to eventually have 1 automated screener.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that continuous involvement of stakeholders at new sites given staff turnover is vital to ensure buy-in. Qualitative research can help identify the potential bias of ML tools and should be widely used to ensure health equity. Ongoing collaboration among CDSS developers, data scientists, and clinical providers may help refine CDSS for optimal use and improve the acceptability of CDSS in the clinical context.
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.