SynthesisBMC geriatrics2026
Risk prediction model for malnutrition in older adults: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC geriatrics, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGlobal population aging is a major public health trend. The incidence of malnutrition among older adults is also continuously rising. The occurrence of malnutrition among older adults will affect their quality of life and disease prognosis. Although various risk prediction models have been developed to identify the risk of malnutrition in older adults, a comprehensive systematic review of these models is currently lacking.
objectiveThe aim is to systematically evaluate the risk prediction models for malnutrition in older adults that have been published both domestically and internationally, assess their predictive performance, verification status, and methodological quality, thereby providing a basis for selecting appropriate models in clinical practice.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in Chinese and English databases. These included PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, CNKI, Wanfang Database, VIP Database, and SinoMed. Relevant literature on predictive models for malnutrition risk in older adults was included. The search period covered the establishment of the databases to July 1, 2025. Only Chinese and English publications were considered. Two researchers independently screened the literature according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. They evaluated the quality of the included literature and extracted the data. The PROBAST risk of bias and applicability tool was used to assess the risk of bias and applicability of the included research models. Data extraction included the first author, publication year, country, study subjects, study type, predictive factors, model construction methods, and predictive performance.
resultA total of 27 articles were included, comprising 27 models. The sample size ranged from 115 to 3387 cases. Regarding model construction methods, Logistic regression models and Machine learning approaches were used. For model presentation, nomograms and regression equations were primarily used. The number of final included predictive factors ranged from 3 to 17, with common factors including age, BMI, hemoglobin level, serum albumin level, depression status, and daily activity ability (ADL). In terms of performance, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) ranged from 0.687 to 0.984. Validation was conducted internally in 16 studies, while 8 studies conducted external validation. Overall, the applicability of the included models was good; however, all studies demonstrated a high risk of bias.
conclusionThe included models have relatively good predictive performance. However, the overall study has a high risk of bias. In the future, it may be considered to adopt visual model presentation methods to build models with low bias risk, superior predictive performance, and strong clinical applicability.
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.