Observational studyThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2026
MNA-SF screening and GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition in geriatric patients - A cross-sectional multicenter study.
Observational study in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo examine the relationship between the Mini Nutritional Assessment Short Form (MNA-SF) screening for malnutrition and the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) diagnosis and the difference between the globally agreed GLIM two-step approach with prior screening (GLIMs+) and the alternative one-step approach without prior screening (GLIMs-) in a large group of geriatric patients. DESIGN AND
settingCross-sectional multicenter study in eight geriatric institutions in Germany.
participants681 geriatric patients. MEASUREMENTS: Patient characteristics, MNA-SF and GLIM criteria were assessed in all patients using standardized questionnaires based on routine geriatric assessments. Malnutrition prevalence rates, Cohen's kappa and diagnostic test parameters were calculated to compare MNA-SF results with GLIMs- and GLIMs- with GLIMs+.
results88.1 % of all patients (83 ± 6.7 years; 68.0 % women) were MNA-SF positive (38.8 % malnourished, 49.3 % at risk). GLIMs- malnutrition was diagnosed in 44.6 %, GLIMs+ in 43.5 % of all patients. 8 patients (1.2 %) were normal according to MNA-SF and malnourished according to GLIMs- (false negative). Sensitivity of MNA-SF compared to GLIMs- was 0.97, specificity 0.19. Sensitivity of GLIMs- compared to GLIMs+ was 1.00, specificity 0.98. Cohen's kappa indicated slight agreement between MNA-SF and GLIMs- (κ = 0.153) and near-perfect agreement between GLIMs- and GLIMs+ (κ = 0.976).
conclusionThe very good agreement between GLIMs- and GLIMs+ may argue in favor of direct GLIM diagnosis without prior screening, but prior MNA-SF screening saved the effort of GLIM testing in 12 % of all patients with only very few false negatives and also identifies the large group of at-risk patients who may benefit from preventive interventions.
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.