ArticleJournal of clinical nursing2024
Evaluation of different screening tools for detection of malnutrition in hospitalised patients.
Article in Journal of clinical nursing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of disease related malnutrition assessed by NRS2002, STAMP, MNA-SF, one-step and two-step GLIM at admission and discharge: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- A randomised controlled crossover study to assess adherence and palatability of a porridge supplement compared to a drink-based supplement in hospitalised older adults at risk of malnutrition.Journal of nutritional science · 2026Trial
- Nurse-Led Nutritional Screening and Early Identification of Malnutrition Among Hospitalized Older Adults: A Scoping Review.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Observational
- Malnutrition Screening Tools for Geriatric Patients Presenting to Emergency Department: Agreement and Prognostic Utility for Hospital Admission and Length of Stay.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Association between postoperative nutritional status and time to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy in gastrointestinal cancers: a restricted cubic spline analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Nutrition status of hospitalized patients in the first decade of Chinese nutritionDay survey: Assessment using the ESPEN and GLIM criteria.Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition · 2025Article
- Advances and challenges in nutritional screening and assessment for cancer patients: a comprehensive systematic review and future directions.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- Machine learning and the nomogram as the accurate tools for predicting postoperative malnutrition risk in esophageal cancer patients.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Evaluation of different screening tools for detection of malnutrition in hospitalised patients.Journal of clinical nursing · 2024Article
- Determinants of Malnourishment in the Institutionalized Older Population: The FRAGILESS Study.Nutrients · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
AIMS AND
objectivesTo assess the prevalence of malnutrition in hospitalised adult patients, and to evaluate the accuracy of the most commonly used nutritional screening tools for identifying individuals at risk of malnutrition.
methodsA prospective cross-sectional study was conducted on a total of 248 hospitalised patients in internal medicine wards (mean age: 75.2 years; 39.5% females). Nutritional screening was performed within 48 h of admission using the following tools: Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Nutrition Risk Screening Tool (NRS-2002), Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ), and Mini Nutritional Assessment Short Form (MNA-SF). The criteria of the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) were used as the gold standard for defining malnutrition. Patients were also evaluated using the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) and the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria. Accuracy was determined by examining sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic agreement was determined by calculation of Cohen's kappa (κ). The study is reported as per the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines.
resultsThe ESPEN criteria classified 20.2% of the hospitalised patients as malnourished. Overall, the MUST had the highest sensitivity (80.0%), specificity (74.7%) and positive predictive value (44.4%). For the subgroup of patients aged >65 years, the MNA-SF had high sensitivity (94.4%) but low specificity (39.0%). Based on Cohen's κ, the SGA and GLIM criteria showed low agreement with the ESPEN criteria.
conclusionThe MUST was the most accurate nutritional screening tool, through the MST is more easily applied in many clinical settings. A comprehensive assessment of malnutrition that considers muscle mass is crucial for the reliable diagnosis of malnutrition. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The present findings underscore the importance of accurate assessment of the malnutrition status of hospitalised patients and the need for a reliable screening tool. No patient or public contribution.
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.