Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40718223›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Implementation of the GLIM (Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition) Criteria in Gastrointestinal Oncology: A Narrative Review of Systemic Impact and the Role of Dietitians.

Keita Ishido, Mio Nakashima, Saseem Poudel, Zen Naito, Akitaka Motoyoshi, Kaito Sano, Satoshi Hirano

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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.

Keita IshidoSurgery, Asahikawa City Hospital, Asahikawa, JPN.
Mio NakashimaNutrition, Japanese Red Cross Asahikawa Hospital, Asahikawa, JPN.
Saseem PoudelGastroenterological Surgery II, Hokkaido University Faculty of Medicine, Sapporo, JPN.
Zen NaitoGastroenterological Surgery II, Hokkaido University Faculty of Medicine, Sapporo, JPN.
Akitaka MotoyoshiGastroenterological Surgery II, Hokkaido University Faculty of Medicine, Sapporo, JPN.
Kaito SanoGastroenterological Surgery II, Hokkaido University Faculty of Medicine, Sapporo, JPN.
Satoshi HiranoGastroenterological Surgery II, Hokkaido University Faculty of Medicine, Sapporo, JPN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Malnutrition is a common yet frequently underrecognized condition among patients with gastrointestinal cancers, significantly impacting treatment tolerance, postoperative recovery, and long-term outcomes. This narrative review explores the clinical implementation of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria in gastrointestinal oncology, with a particular focus on its impact on multidisciplinary workflows and the evolving role of clinical dietitians. A structured literature search was conducted using PubMed to identify English-language publications from 2018 to 2025 that included the terms "GLIM," "malnutrition," "gastrointestinal cancer," "nutritional assessment," and "oncology." Fifty-three articles were selected for inclusion based on their relevance to GLIM criteria implementation and interdisciplinary care models in oncologic settings. In clinical practice, the GLIM framework has elevated nutrition care from an ancillary task to a core component of oncology management. The adoption of GLIM criteria encourages interprofessional collaboration, involving surgeons, oncologists, nurses, and dietitians. It also necessitates the use of tools such as bioelectrical impedance analysis and computed tomography to assess muscle mass, as well as laboratory markers of inflammation, further reinforcing the technical competencies required of dietitians. However, barriers remain. Implementation is hindered by limited training, workflow inconsistencies, time constraints, and disparities in access to diagnostic tools, particularly in resource-limited settings. Additionally, institutional variability and lack of integration into reimbursement systems pose systemic challenges. To support sustainable adoption, many institutions have established structured referral pathways, interdisciplinary training initiatives, and electronic health record algorithms for GLIM-based assessment. These efforts are crucial for overcoming barriers and standardizing care. Furthermore, GLIM-based protocols have improved patient engagement and empowered patients to participate more actively in their nutritional care, especially through the use of standardized tools like the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment. Looking forward, further research is needed to validate simplified diagnostic methods, improve equity in access, and assess long-term impacts on survival and quality of life. Policy reforms, including the recognition of GLIM-based malnutrition in coding systems, could enhance institutional incentives for implementation. Ultimately, the GLIM criteria provide not only a diagnostic tool but also a foundational framework for advancing equitable, interdisciplinary, and patient-centered nutrition care in oncology.

Indexed as

clinical dietitiangastrointestinal cancerglim criteriamultidisciplinary carenutritional assessment

Identifiers

PMID40718223
PMCPMC12296963

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.