Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40692277›Full record

ArticleJournal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association2025

Menu Assessment Tools Used in Residential Aged Care: A Scoping Review of Content and Quality.

Karly Bartrim, Alice Pashley, Mikaela Wheeler, Lily Chen, Lisa Sossen, Tracy Hancock, Danielle Cave

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Inadequate Micronutrient Intakes: Exploring the Vitamin and Mineral Intakes and Food Sources of New Zealand Aged-Care Residents.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Karly BartrimSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3528-4341
Alice PashleySchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7984-7850
Mikaela WheelerSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7706-8113
Lily ChenGraduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, New South Wales.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4054-4849
Lisa SossenLisa Sossen and Associates, Elsternwick, Victoria, Australia.
Tracy HancockSchool of Health, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Queensland, Australia.
Danielle CaveSchool of Health, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8570-9411

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This scoping review aimed to identify and synthesise existing publicly available tools that support menu assessments for residential aged care settings, specifically the tools content areas, recommendations and quality. The scoping review was conducted according to Levac et al. scoping review methodology and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Menu assessment tools were identified through grey literature through Google and Google Scholar search engines using key terms such as 'residential aged care' and 'menu assessment'. Data were synthesised and reported narratively, according to content areas of menu planning, nutritional basis of the menu, texture modification/fluid consistency, therapeutic and special diets and foodservice management recommendations. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation Instrument. Seventeen tools from seven countries were included. There was variability in the content and recommendations, with no included tool covering all content areas. The overall quality ranged from two to six (out of seven), and no tools met the quality criteria to be recommended for use in their current form. The lack of consistency in content areas, recommendations and quality of tools indicates the need to modify existing tools or to conduct research to support the development of a new evidence-based tool. Future research is needed to gain consensus on acceptable content areas, appropriate recommendations and to develop an evidence-base to underpin the tools. A purpose-built, evidence-based tool is essential for consistent foodservice evaluation and for improving food and nutrition standards, ultimately enhancing resident outcomes.

Indexed as

Homes for the AgedMenu PlanningNursing HomesNutrition AssessmentAgedFood ServicesHumansfood and nutritionmenu assessmentresidential aged care

Identifiers

PMID40692277
PMCPMC12280851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.