ArticleScientific reports2024
The predictive value of GLIM criteria on clinical outcomes and responses to nutritional support in patients with neurocritical illnesses.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Comparative prognostic performance of nutritional assessment tools in critically ill surgical patients after emergency surgery for sepsis or septic shock: a single-center retrospective study in South Korea.Acute and critical care · 2026Article
- From GLIM diagnosis to "nutrition-intelligent" stroke rehabilitation: implementation priorities after Bahat et al.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Association Between Malnutrition and Multi-Drug Resistant Bacterial Infections in Neurosurgical Intensive Care Unit Patients.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Status quo, influencing factors, and association with hospitalization outcomes of malnutrition in neurological disorders in China: a national cross-sectional study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Neurocritically ill patients frequently exhibit coma, gastroparesis, and intense catabolism, leading to an increased risk of malnutrition. The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition was created to achieve a consistent malnutrition diagnosis across diverse populations. This study aimed to validate the concurrent and predictive validity of GLIM criteria in patients with neurocritical illnesses. A total of 135 participants were followed from admission to the neurocritical unit (NCU) until discharge. Comparing GLIM criteria to the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA), sensitivity was 0.95 and specificity was 0.69. Predictive validity of GLIM criteria was assessed using a composite adverse clinical outcome, comprising mortality and various major complications. Adjusted hazard ratios for moderate and severe malnutrition were 2.86 (95% CI 1.45-5.67) and 3.88 (95% CI 1.51-9.94), respectively. Changes in indicators of nutritional status, including skeletal muscle mass and abdominal fat mass, within 7 days of admission were obtained for 61 participants to validate the predictive capability of the GLIM criteria for the patients' response of standardized nutritional support. The GLIM criteria have a statistically significant predictive validity on changes in rectus femoris muscle thickness and midarm muscle circumference. In conclusion, the GLIM criteria demonstrate high sensitivity for diagnosing malnutrition in neurocritically ill patients and exhibit good predictive validity.
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.