ArticleHeliyon2024
Comparison of different nutritional screening tools in nutritional screening of patients with cirrhosis: A cross-sectional observational study.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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
- Research progress on nutritional support for patients with liver cirrhosis complicated by upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: The Royal Free Hospital Nutritional Prioritizing Tool (RFH-NPT), the Liver Disease Undernutrition Screening Tool (LDUST) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) were used by nurses to screen, compare, and analyze the nutritional status of patients with liver cirrhosis. The application value of different screening tools was summarized in the nutritional screening of patients with liver cirrhosis. Methods: In this study, LDUST, RFH-NPT, and NRS2002 were used by nurses to screen the nutritional status of hospitalized patients with liver cirrhosis within 24-48 h after admission. The study calculated validity indicators such as sensitivity, specificity, the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), and reliability indicators such as the Kappa coefficient. The efficacy of these screening tools in the nutritional screening of patients with liver cirrhosis was compared. Results: Among the 207 patients, LDUST and NRS2002 identified 72.9 % and 23.7 % as undernourished, respectively. The sensitivity of LDUST and NRS2002 were 92.1 % and 30.0 %, respectively. The Kappa value of LDUST and RFH-NPT was 0.620, and the Kappa value of LDUST compared with NRS2002 was 0.144. Conclusion: This study shows that the Liver Disease Undernutrition Screening Tool, a special screening tool for patients with liver cirrhosis, has a more reliable screening effect and higher sensitivity than NRS2002. The Liver Disease Undernutrition Screening Tool is recommended for nutritional screening in patients with liver cirrhosis.
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.