Cited by 131Nutrition and Health in AgingClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyBody Composition Measurement Techniques

Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM): Guidance on Validation of the Operational Criteria for the Diagnosis of Protein‐Energy Malnutrition in Adults

Open access
Keller, Heather, de van der Schueren, Marian A. E., for the GLIM Consortium, Jensen, Gordon L., Barazzoni, Rocco, Compher, Charlene, Correia, M. Isabel T. D., Gonzalez, M. Cristina +5 more·2020·Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

Abstract

Background: The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) created a consensus‐based framework consisting of phenotypic and etiologic criteria to record the occurrence of malnutrition in adults. This is a minimum set of practicable indicators for use in characterizing a patient/client as malnourished, considering the global variations in screening and nutrition assessment, and to be used across different healthcare settings. As with other consensus‐based frameworks for diagnosing disease states, these operational criteria require validation and reliability testing, as they are currently based solely on expert opinion. Methods: Several forms of validation and reliability are reviewed in the context of GLIM, providing guidance on how to conduct retrospective and prospective studies for criterion and construct validity. Results: There are some aspects of GLIM that require refinement; research using large databases can be employed to reach this goal. Machine learning is also introduced as a potential method to support identification of the best cut points and combinations of indicators for use with the different forms of malnutrition, which the GLIM criteria were created to denote. It is noted as well that validation and reliability testing need to occur in a variety of sectors and populations and with diverse persons using GLIM criteria. Conclusion: The guidance presented supports the conduct and publication of quality validation and reliability studies for GLIM.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jpen.1806

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • One meta-analysis included a general sample of 20 studies with 10,781 patients from 13 countries, showing sensitivity of 72% (range 51%-92%) and specificity of 82% (range 73%-98%) relative to SGA or Patient-Generated SGA as the mainly used semi-gold standard.

    “One included a general sample (mixed settings) of 20 studies with 10,781 patients from 13 countries, showing a sensitivity of 72% with a range of 51%–92% (ie, capacity to identify true positive cases) and a specificity of 82% with a range of 73%–98% (ie, capacity to identify true negative cases) relative to SGA or Patient‐Generated SGA as the mainly used semi‐gold standard.”

    From GLIM consensus approach to diagnosis of malnutrition: A 5‐year update (2025) · cites this paper as [7]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The GLIM Consortium provided a guidance paper on how to perform studies targeting construct or criterion validity and predictive validity.

    “the GLIM Consortium provided a guidance paper 7 , 8 on how to perform studies targeting construct or criterion validity (ie, to assure that the model identifies malnutrition) and predictive validity (ie, that the model identifies cases with adverse clinical outcomes).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Gibson RS. Principles of nutrition assessment. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keller, H., de van der Schueren, M. A. E., for the GLIM Consortium, Jensen, G. L., Barazzoni, R., Compher, C., Correia, M. I. T. D., Gonzalez, M. C., Jager‐Wittenaar, H., Pirlich, M., Steiber, A., Waitzberg, D., & Cederholm, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
  • Department of Nutrition and Health School of Allied Health HAN University of Applied Sciences Nijmegen the Netherlands
  • University of Vermont (US)
  • University of Trieste (IT)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (BR)
  • Post‐Graduate Program in Health and Behaviour Catholic University of Pelotas Pelotas Rio Grande do Sul Brazil
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • Endocrinology, Gastroenterology, Clinical Nutrition Imperial Oak Outpatient Clinic (Kaisereiche) Berlin Germany
  • Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (US)
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Keller, Heather
Venue
Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-06-11
Volume
44
Issue
6
Pages
992-1003
ISSN
  • 0148-6071 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-2444
OpenAlex
W3034377458
Cited by
131
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 5
FWCI
2.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • ArTS Archivio della ricerca di Trieste (University of Trieste https://www.units.it/) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
Keywords
GLIM, protein-energy malnutrition, criterion validity, construct validity, reliability testing, machine learning, cut points
MeSH terms
Adult, Humans, Leadership, Nutritional Status, Prospective Studies, Protein-Energy Malnutrition, Retrospective Studies, Reproducibility of Results, Malnutrition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review