Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37485030›Full record

ArticlePediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition2023

Value of Nutritional Screening Tools Versus Anthropometric Measurements in Evaluating Nutritional Status of Children in a Low/Middle-Income Country.

Shaimaa Sayed, Mortada H F El-Shabrawi, Eman Abdelmonaem, Nehal El Koofy, Sara Tarek

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shaimaa SayedDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9009-165X
Mortada H F El-ShabrawiDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1995-4213
Eman AbdelmonaemDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-1750-9248
Nehal El KoofyDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7464-6715
Sara TarekDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5132-4019
Cairo University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Pediatric patients in low-income countries are at a high risk of malnutrition. Numerous screening tools have been developed to detect the risk of malnutrition, including the Subjective Global Nutritional Assessment (SGNA), Pediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS), Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Pediatrics (STAMP), and Screening Tool for Risk of Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONGkids). However, anthropometry remains the main tool for assessing malnutrition. We aimed to identify the value of four nutritional screening tools versus anthropometry for evaluating the nutritional status of children. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 1,000 children aged 1-12 years who visited the outpatient clinic of Cairo University Pediatric Hospital. Each participant was evaluated using anthropometric measurements (weight, length/height, and weight for length/height) as well as the PYMS, STAMP, STRONGkids, and SGNA screening tools. The sensitivities and specificities of these four tools were assessed using anthropometry as the gold standard. Results: Of the patients, 1.7% were underweight, 10.2% were wasted, and 35% were stunted. STRONGkids demonstrated the highest sensitivity (79.4%) and a high specificity (80.2%) for detecting malnutrition compared with weight for height, followed by STAMP, which demonstrated lower sensitivity (73.5%) but higher specificity (81.4%). PYMS demonstrated the lowest sensitivity (66.7%) and the highest specificity (93.5%), whereas SAGA demonstrated higher sensitivity (77.5%) and lower specificity (85.4%) than PYMS. Conclusion: The use of nutritional screening tools to evaluate the nutritional status of children is valuable and recommended as a simple and rapid method for identifying the risk of malnutrition in pediatric patients.

Indexed as

Growth disordersNutritional risk screening toolsPediatric malnutritionScreening Tool for Risk of Nutritional Status and Growth

Identifiers

PMID37485030
PMCPMC10356972
OpenAlexW4384210262

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.