ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2024
Validation of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition Criteria for Predicting Adverse Outcomes in Acute Pancreatitis.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- MASLD and Pancreatic Diseases: From Shared Mechanisms to Clinical Implications and Future Directions.Nutrients · 2026Review
- The Individual and Joint Associations of Sarcopenic Obesity and Malnutrition on Predicting the Severity of Acute Pancreatitis.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) has proposed criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition. No studies validated the GLIM criteria in acute pancreatitis (AP). The present study aimed to validate the predictive capacity of GLIM criteria for adverse outcomes in AP patients. Patients and Methods: Clinical data of 269 patients with AP were analyzed retrospectively. The Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) was chosen as the screening tool. Multivariate logistic regression analyses evaluated the adverse clinical outcomes in malnourished patients. Results: Overall, 160 patients (59.5%) were at nutritional risk and 38 (14.1%) were malnourished. Reduced muscle mass/ low body mass index + inflammation combinations contributed most to malnutrition overall and in each subgroup. The malnourished group had lower hemoglobin, neutrophils, albumin, total cholesterol, and triglycerides than the well-nourished group. The malnourished group had higher hospitalization costs (CNY, 11319.34 vs 9258.22, p <0.001) and more local complications (34.2% vs 14.7%, p =0.009) than the well-nourished group. There was an interaction between malnutrition and overweight/obesity on local complications (p for interaction = 0.023). Multivariate logistic regression showed malnutrition was significantly associated with local complications (OR 12.2, 95% CI: 2.51-59.37), infectious complications (OR 9.95, 95% CI: 1.25-79.44) and composite adverse outcome (OR 4.78, 95% CI: 1.05-21.73) in the overweight/obesity subgroup. There was no association between malnutrition and the rate of various adverse outcomes in the non-overweight/obesity subgroup. Additionally, we observed an association between malnutrition and composite adverse outcome (OR 6.75, 95% CI: Conclusion: Malnourished AP patients were more likely to have adverse outcomes than well-nourished patients. Malnutrition was associated with various adverse outcomes only in the overweight/obesity subgroups.
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.