SynthesisNutrients2025
Nutritional Adequacy and Dietary Assessment Approaches in Institutionalised Older Adults Living in Long-Term Care Settings: A Systematic Review (2004-2024).
Synthesis in Nutrients, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of the Provision of Plant-Based, Vegetarian and Omnivorous Meals in UK Care Homes for Older People.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026Article
- Micronutrient Status, Health Implications, and Assessment Aproaches in Older Adults: A Narrative Review of Recent Studies.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Energy Adequacy of Planned Diets in Institutionalized Older Adults: A Scenario Analysis Based on Requirements from Indirect Calorimetry.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Cardiometabolic risk pathways in adults with disabilities: A structural equation model of diet quality and functional ability.PloS one · 2026Article
- The intake-adequacy gap in dysphagia nutrition: texture-modified foods, nutrient delivery and realised intake in older adults.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdequate nutrition in long-term care (LTC) settings is critical for the health and well-being of institutionalised older adults, yet global evidence consistently reveals significant gaps in dietary provision.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of observational studies published between January 2004 and December 2024 in PubMed and Scopus, following PRISMA 2020 and JBI guidelines. The review assessed whether planned menus and residents' actual intake met recognised dietary reference values, described dietary assessment methods, and identified common nutrient shortfalls.
results34 observational studies from 16 countries were included. The most frequently used assessment methods were weighed food records (50.0%), menu analyses (29.4%), and 24 h recalls or food diaries (20.6%). Among the 25 studies reporting mean daily energy intake, 68.0% documented values between 1250 and 1800 kcal/day, and 73.5% indicated intakes below established reference values. Additionally, 11 studies (32.4%) found that residents consumed less than 75% of the energy planned in menus. Protein intake was below 60 g/day or 0.83 g/kg body weight/day in 41.2% of studies. Across 22 studies assessing micronutrients, recurrent inadequacies included vitamin D (61.8%), calcium (55.9%), folate (50.0%), zinc (41.2%), and fibre (47.1%). In studies quantifying planned-served-consumed stages, actual intake represented approximately 64.0-87.0% of planned energy and protein.
conclusionsNutrition in LTC settings frequently falls short of meeting the energy and nutrient requirements of institutionalised older adults. Persistent inadequacies in energy, protein, and key micronutrients were observed across studies, alongside substantial variability in dietary assessment methods and reference frameworks, limiting comparability of findings.
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.