ArticleInternal medicine (Tokyo, Japan)2026
Comparison of Three Nutritional Screening Tools in Older Patients with Urgent Hospitalization for Various Respiratory Diseases.
Article in Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Malnutrition upon admission is strongly associated with poor clinical outcomes in geriatric patients. However, studies evaluating the prognostic value of nutritional assessment tools for respiratory diseases that require urgent hospitalization remain limited. This study aimed to identify suitable tools for assessing nutritional status and to examine their potential as prognostic indicators. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients of ≥65 years of age who were hospitalized for respiratory disease. The nutritional status at admission was evaluated using three different screening tools: the Mini Nutritional Assessment Short-Form (MNA-SF), Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), and Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI). Results A total of 152 consecutive patients (median age 77 years) were included in the analysis. Thirty-five patients died during hospitalization. The proportion of patients classified as having nutritional risk was similar across the MNA-SF, PNI, and GNRI (62.5%, 67.2%, and 61.2%, respectively). Significant differences in in-hospital mortality were observed between the normal and at-risk groups when stratified by MNA-SF and GNRI, but not by PNI. In multivariable logistical analyses, after adjusting for the confounding factors of age, sex, smoking history, MNA-SF (<11) and GNRI (<92) were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for MNA-SF in predicting in-hospital mortality was significantly greater than that for the GNRI. Moreover, patients with MNA-SF scores of <11 had significantly lower survival rates than those with normal scores. Conclusion Among the three tools, the MNA-SF demonstrated the strongest prognostic value for in-hospital mortality in older adults with acute respiratory illnesses.
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.