{"title":"谁、何时、为何以及如何筛查营养不良的关键考虑因素。","authors":"Ingvild Paur, Inger Ottestad","doi":"10.1097/MCO.0000000000001144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Confusion and disagreement about malnutrition screening, how, when, why, who to screen, and which screening tool to use, have persisted since the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) established the malnutrition diagnosis in 2019. In this review, we discuss the purpose of malnutrition screening, presents recent validations of screening tools and how the choice of tools affects malnutrition prevalence within the GLIM framework.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The screening for malnutrition should consider the results of recent validations of screening tools against the GLIM criteria, which reveal variations based on the specific tool, the population, and the setting. Likewise, the prevalence of malnutrition varies with the population and setting, and even how screening tools are applied in the process. Currently, all screening tools exclude patients who meet the GLIM criteria for a malnutrition diagnosis, but the extent of exclusion varies.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>In this review, we summarize recent prevalence and validation studies on screening tools related to GLIM. We argue that screening tools should align with GLIM malnutrition diagnosis criteria, need to be validated against GLIM, and discuss the requirement that a positive screening result is mandatory for a malnutrition diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":10962,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care","volume":" ","pages":"388-395"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Key considerations for who, when, why, and how to screen for malnutrition.\",\"authors\":\"Ingvild Paur, Inger Ottestad\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCO.0000000000001144\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Confusion and disagreement about malnutrition screening, how, when, why, who to screen, and which screening tool to use, have persisted since the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) established the malnutrition diagnosis in 2019. In this review, we discuss the purpose of malnutrition screening, presents recent validations of screening tools and how the choice of tools affects malnutrition prevalence within the GLIM framework.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The screening for malnutrition should consider the results of recent validations of screening tools against the GLIM criteria, which reveal variations based on the specific tool, the population, and the setting. Likewise, the prevalence of malnutrition varies with the population and setting, and even how screening tools are applied in the process. Currently, all screening tools exclude patients who meet the GLIM criteria for a malnutrition diagnosis, but the extent of exclusion varies.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>In this review, we summarize recent prevalence and validation studies on screening tools related to GLIM. We argue that screening tools should align with GLIM malnutrition diagnosis criteria, need to be validated against GLIM, and discuss the requirement that a positive screening result is mandatory for a malnutrition diagnosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10962,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"388-395\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCO.0000000000001144\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCO.0000000000001144","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Key considerations for who, when, why, and how to screen for malnutrition.
Purpose of review: Confusion and disagreement about malnutrition screening, how, when, why, who to screen, and which screening tool to use, have persisted since the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) established the malnutrition diagnosis in 2019. In this review, we discuss the purpose of malnutrition screening, presents recent validations of screening tools and how the choice of tools affects malnutrition prevalence within the GLIM framework.
Recent findings: The screening for malnutrition should consider the results of recent validations of screening tools against the GLIM criteria, which reveal variations based on the specific tool, the population, and the setting. Likewise, the prevalence of malnutrition varies with the population and setting, and even how screening tools are applied in the process. Currently, all screening tools exclude patients who meet the GLIM criteria for a malnutrition diagnosis, but the extent of exclusion varies.
Summary: In this review, we summarize recent prevalence and validation studies on screening tools related to GLIM. We argue that screening tools should align with GLIM malnutrition diagnosis criteria, need to be validated against GLIM, and discuss the requirement that a positive screening result is mandatory for a malnutrition diagnosis.
期刊介绍：
A high impact review journal which boasts an international readership, Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care offers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and exciting developments within the field of clinical nutrition and metabolic care. Published bimonthly, each issue features insightful editorials and high quality invited reviews covering two or three key disciplines which include protein, amino acid metabolism and therapy, lipid metabolism and therapy, nutrition and the intensive care unit and carbohydrates. Each discipline introduces world renowned guest editors to ensure the journal is at the forefront of knowledge development and delivers balanced, expert assessments of advances from the previous year.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
