ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2025
Consistency of Mini-Nutritional Assessment short form and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 in nutritional evaluation of diabetic foot patients.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2025. 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.
- Risk prediction model for cognitive frailty in older adults with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
- 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Malnutrition has numerous adverse effects on the treatment and prognosis of diabetic foot (DF) patients, making it essential to determine the nutritional state to recognize malnutrition as early as possible. However, there is currently no acknowledged nutritional screening instrument for DF patients. This research aimed to identify the most appropriate nutritional assessment tool for this population. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study with 247 DF patients. Nutritional assessments were performed using Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) and the Mini-Nutritional Assessment short form (MNA-SF). The comparisons between scales were carried out based on the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria. The Cohen's kappa ( Results: Ninety-eight patients (39.68%) were diagnosed with malnutrition according to the GLIM criteria. The detection rates of MNA-SF and NRS2002 were 48.18 and 42.51%, respectively. MNA-SF was better correlated with the GLIM criteria, with a higher Kappa value (0.665 vs. 0.535) and a greater area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.860 vs. 0.792) than NRS2002. Additionally, MNA-SF and NRS2002 had similar specificity (79.2 vs. 85.2%), but MNA-SF demonstrated higher sensitivity (89.8 vs. 67.4%). Conclusions: This study is the first to describe the malnutrition diagnostic capacity of nutritional screening tools (MNA-SF and NRS2002) compared with the GLIM criteria. Our results indicate that the incidence of malnutrition is relatively high among DF patients, and the MNA-SF showed better sensitivity and correlation with the GLIM diagnostic criteria for malnutrition than NRS2002. Therefore, MNA-SF is more recommended for screening malnutrition in the DF population.
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.