ReviewCurrent medical science2024
Nutritional Assessment Tools for Patients with Cancer: A Narrative Review.
Review in Current medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effect of quantitative goal exercise combined with whole process refined nutrition management on the nutritional status and quality of life of head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy: an open-label, randomized, controlled trial.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Trial
- Patterns of Body Composition Changes and Their Predictors During Cancer Therapy in Newly Diagnosed Adult Oncology Patients With Varying Baseline Nutritional Status at a Tertiary Hospital in Ethiopia: A Prospective Cohort Study.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- The Impact of Nutritional Support on Outcomes of Lung Cancer Surgery-Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Comparing GLIM and SGA Nutritional Criteria for Malnutrition Assessment and Prognosis in Chronic Heart Failure Patients.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Advances and challenges in nutritional screening and assessment for cancer patients: a comprehensive systematic review and future directions.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- Nutritional Prognosis of Patients Submitted to Radiotherapy and Its Implications in Treatment.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Validation of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition Criteria for Predicting Adverse Outcomes in Acute Pancreatitis.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2024Article
- Comparative Study of Different Inflammation Definition Methods of GLIM in the Diagnosis of Malnutrition in Patients with Acute Pancreatitis.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer patients are at high risk of malnutrition, which can lead to adverse health outcomes such as prolonged hospitalization, increased complications, and increased mortality. Accurate and timely nutritional assessment plays a critical role in effectively managing malnutrition in these patients. However, while many tools exist to assess malnutrition, there is no universally accepted standard. Although different tools have their own strengths and limitations, there is a lack of narrative reviews on nutritional assessment tools for cancer patients. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a non-systematic literature search using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from their inception until May 2023. A total of 90 studies met our selection criteria and were included in our narrative review. We evaluated the applications, strengths, and limitations of 4 commonly used nutritional assessment tools for cancer patients: the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA), Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), and Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM). Our findings revealed that malnutrition was associated with adverse health outcomes. Each of these 4 tools has its applications, strengths, and limitations. Our findings provide medical staff with a foundation for choosing the optimal tool to rapidly and accurately assess malnutrition in cancer patients. It is essential for medical staff to be familiar with these common tools to ensure effective nutritional management of cancer patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38289530What 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.