ArticleClinical and experimental pediatrics2025
Exploring nutritional screening tools for hospitalized children: a narrative review.
Article in Clinical and experimental pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical value of nutrition screening tools in mechanically ventilated critically ill children: Clinical application considerations.JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition · 2026Article
- Association between admission undernutrition and mortality rates and adverse outcomes in a pediatric intensive care unit in India: a prospective cohort study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Preoperative nutritional risk and adverse perioperative outcomes in children with congenital choledochal cysts: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Malnutrition is common among hospitalized children, especially those who are critically ill. Routine measures, such as anthropometric measurements, body composition, and nutritional assessment, comprise the basics of monitoring. This review discusses the adequacy of nutritional screening tools (NSTs) such as the SGNA (Subjective Global Nutritional Assessment), PYMS (Pediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score), STAMP (Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics), and STRONGkids (Screening Tool for Risk of Nutritional Status and Growth). This review included recently published reports supporting the validation and implementation of NSTs in pediatric populations. A child's nutritional status during hospitalization is of great importance for their recovery, while the implementation of screening tools enhances their clinical outcomes. Current tools have varying sensitivities and specificities, and no single tool can be recommended for all groups of hospitalized children. A combination of tools or adaptation of existing tools with validation in different contexts might be ideal. Further studies are required to develop more robust and comprehensive screening tools.
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.