ArticleEuropean geriatric medicine2026
Interprofessional nutrition and dysphagia management for care-dependent older adults in day-care services: a non-randomized controlled trial.
Article in European geriatric medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
purposeMalnutrition and dysphagia in older adults complicate the maintenance of independent living. This study aimed to evaluate a dietary observation and assessment model by non-specialized staff and a consultation and support model by specialized staff in adult day services (ADS).
methodsThis non-randomized controlled trial was conducted across 31 ADS facilities in Japan. Participants were care-dependent older adults (n = 590; median age, 85 years; 69% female) for whom a 6-month follow-up assessment was completed, including body weight measurement, diet texture documentation, and Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) scoring. The intervention group (n = 317) received 3 months of monthly mealtime observation by non-specialized staff, with targeted consultation from specialists (dental hygienists, dietitians) for individuals at risk, whereas the control group (n = 273) received usual care. The primary outcome was weight loss of ≥ 5% at 6 months, analyzed using a mixed-effects model. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of attrition.
resultsThe incidence of ≥ 5% weight loss was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (10.1% vs 17.3%; adjusted odds ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.89). This finding was upheld in a realistic sensitivity scenario. The intervention group showed a significantly greater increase in the use of texture-modified diets (p = 0.039) without a change in oral intake ability.
conclusionAn interprofessional model combining observation by non-specialized staff with targeted specialist support offers a promising, efficient, and scalable strategy to mitigate the risk of weight loss in older adults who attend day-care settings.
trial registrationUMIN000056668, 2025/01/08, retrospectively registered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41160349What 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.