CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 75Nutrition and Health in AgingClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyBody Composition Measurement Techniques

GLIM consensus approach to diagnosis of malnutrition: A 5‐year update

Open access
Jensen, Gordon L., Cederholm, Tommy, Correia, M. Isabel T. D., Gonzalez, M. Cristina, Fukushima, Ryoji, Pisprasert, Veeradej, Blaauw, Renee, Braz, Diana Cardenas +35 more·2025·Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
DOI 10.1002/jpen.2756PMC PMC12053077
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) introduced an approach for malnutrition diagnosis in 2019 that comprised screening followed by assessment of three phenotypic criteria (weight loss, low body mass index [BMI], and low muscle mass) and two etiologic criteria (reduced food intake/assimilation and inflammation/disease burden). This planned update reconsiders the GLIM framework based on published knowledge and experience over the past 5 years. Methods: A working group ( n = 43 members) conducted a literature search spanning 2019–2024 using the keywords “Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition or GLIM.” Prior GLIM guidance activities for using the criteria on muscle mass and inflammation were reviewed. Successive rounds of revision and review were used to achieve consensus. Results: More than 400 scientific reports were published in peer‐reviewed journals, forming the basis of 10 systematic reviews, some including meta‐analyses of GLIM validity that indicate strong construct and predictive validity. Limitations and future priorities are discussed. Working group findings suggest that assessment of low muscle mass should be guided by experience and available technological resources. Clinical judgment may suffice to evaluate the inflammation/disease burden etiologic criterion. No revisions of the weight loss, low BMI, or reduced food intake/assimilation criteria are suggested. After two rounds of review and revision, the working group secured 100% agreement with the conclusions reported in the 5‐year update. Conclusion: Ongoing initiatives target priorities that include malnutrition risk screening procedures, GLIM adaptation to the intensive care setting, assessment in support of the reduced food intake/assimilation criterion, and determination of malnutrition in obesity.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This 5-year GLIM update reaffirms the 2019 two-step malnutrition diagnostic framework after reviewing >400 validation/feasibility studies and 10 systematic reviews/meta-analyses. It recommends no changes to weight loss, low BMI, or reduced food intake/assimilation criteria, while providing updated guidance that low muscle mass assessment should follow available expertise/resources and inflammation/disease burden may often be judged clinically.

Key findings

  • More than 400 scientific reports were published from 2019 to May 2024, forming the basis of 10 systematic reviews, some with meta-analyses; the three original GLIM consensus papers were cited >5000 times in Google Scholar, >2300 in Scopus, and >3000 in Web of Science.
  • Criterion validity: one meta-analysis of 20 studies with 10,781 patients from 13 countries found sensitivity 72% (range 51%–92%), specificity 82% (range 73%–98%), and AUC 0.82 versus mainly SGA/PG-SGA, with malnutrition prevalence 44%; a smaller ICU meta-analysis of 5 studies and 337 patients found sensitivity 65.5% (95% CI, 35%–86.8%) and specificity 86.9% (95% CI, 59.3%–96.9%).
  • Predictive validity: eight systematic reviews focused mainly on mortality; the largest meta-analysis in general hospitalized patients included 64 studies with 47,654 participants and found increased 1-year mortality (HR 2.62; 95% CI, 1.95–3.52) and beyond-1-year mortality (HR 2.04; 95% CI, 1.70–2.45), with average malnutrition prevalence 40%–50%.
  • Implementation survey with >1500 respondents found 25% had implemented GLIM and 20% were in process; after two rounds of review/revision, the working group reached 100% agreement with the update conclusions.

Methods

  • Consensus update by a GLIM working group (n = 43) supervised by the GLIM Core Committee, using successive rounds of revision and review; consensus threshold was at least 75% agreement, with final 100% agreement.
  • Literature search used the keywords “Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition or GLIM” for 2019 to May 2024; 10 systematic reviews and meta-analyses of GLIM validation studies published through March 5, 2024 were evaluated.
  • The update synthesized validation evidence, prior GLIM guidance on muscle mass and inflammation, implementation survey results, and working group discussions on screening, phenotypic criteria, etiologic criteria, severity grading, and integration with other diagnostic tools.

Limitations

  • The paper states that a limitation of the reviews is that some of the same studies are included in multiple reviews; three reviews did not include information on whether all five GLIM criteria were addressed by every included study, and approximately 80% of included individual studies reported an assessment of muscle mass.
  • The paper states that the ICU criterion-validity meta-analysis was limited by a small sample of 337 patients and heterogeneity; it also states that severity grading for low muscle mass is not currently possible because only some methods allow differentiation, and further research is needed.
  • The paper states that screening tool choice affects GLIM-diagnosed malnutrition prevalence, global consensus on defining “risk of malnutrition” is not established, and BMI/weight loss may be difficult in fluid overload; it also notes that obesity and fluid accumulation may confound muscle mass assessment, and muscle mass cutoffs remain under discussion.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jpen.2756

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

110 of 129 cited sources checked · 79 supported · 2 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Interpretationcitation

    These publications provide evidence that GLIM has good concurrent criterion validity when compared with established models SGA, MNA-SF, and AAIM.

    “These publications provide evidence that GLIM has good concurrent criterion validity when compared with established models—ie, Subjective Global Assessment (SGA), 9 Mini Nutritional Assessment‐Short Form (MNA‐SF), 10 and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and ASPEN Indicators to Diagnose Malnutrition (AAIM). 11”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [9] Detsky A, McLaughlin JR, Baker J, et al. What is subjective global assessment? JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1987; 11(1): 8‐ 13. 3820522 source
    • cites [10] Guigoz Y, Vellas B. Nutritional assessment in older adults: MNA® 25 years of a screening tool & a reference standard for care and research; what next? J Nutr Health Aging. 2021; 25(4): 528‐ 583. 33786572 source
    • cites [11] White JV, Guenter P, Jensen G, et al. Consensus statement: Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition: characteristics recommended for the identification and documentation of adult malnutrition (undernutrition). JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2012; 36(3): 275‐ 283. 22535923 source
  • Premisecitation

    The GLIM consensus process arrived at a two-step procedure starting with nutrition screening followed by diagnostic assessment for confirmation of malnutrition.

    “The consensus process arrived at a two‐step GLIM procedure that starts with nutrition screening followed by diagnostic assessment for confirmation of malnutrition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source
  • Premisecitation

    The lack of consensus on nutrition concepts and terminology has hindered development of a common nutrition language to support sharing prevalence data, testing targeted interventions, and monitoring outcomes globally.

    “The lack of consensus has hindered the development of a common nutrition language to support sharing of meaningful prevalence data, the testing of targeted interventions, and the monitoring of outcomes across the globe.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [1] Jensen GL, Mirtallo J, Compher C, et al. Adult starvation and disease‐related malnutrition: a proposal for etiology‐based diagnosis in the clinical practice setting from the International Consensus Guideline Committee. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2010; 34(2): 156‐ 159. 20375423 source
    • cites [2] Cederholm T, Barazzoni R, Austin P, et al. ESPEN guidelines on definitions and terminology of clinical nutrition. Clin Nutr. 2017; 36(1): 49‐ 64. 27642056 source

      The Introduction says that inconsistent terminology limits a shared professional language and that consensus would improve the comparability of nutrition practices and advance research. It does not specifically link the lack of consensus to sharing prevalence data, testing targeted interventions, or monitoring outcomes across the globe. (LLM, conf=0.85)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Findingreasoning

    The large number of individual validation studies provided the basis for 10 systematic reviews, some including meta-analyses, exploring different aspects and settings of GLIM published through March 5, 2024.

    “The large number of individual validation studies has provided the basis for 10 SRs, some including meta‐analyses, exploring different aspects and settings of GLIM (Table 1) published through March 5, 2024.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [12] Huo Z, Chong F, Yin L, Lu Z, Liu J, Xu H. Accuracy of the GLIM criteria for diagnosing malnutrition: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(6): 1208‐ 1217. 35504163 source
    • cites [13] Díaz G, Correia MITD, Gonzalez MC, Reyes M. The global leadership initiative on malnutrition criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition inpatients admitted to the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clin Nutr. 2023; 42(2): 182‐ 189. 36599273 source
    • cites [14] Bian W, Li Y, Wang Y, et al. Prevalence of malnutrition based on global leadership initiative in malnutrition criteria for completeness of diagnosis and future risk of malnutrition based on current malnutrition diagnosis: systematic review and meta‐analysis. Front Nutr. 2023; 10: 1174945. 37469547 PMC10352804 source
  • Findingcitation

    Eight systematic reviews, some with meta-analyses, of predictive validity (mainly mortality as the outcome) were published.

    “Concurrently, eight SRs, some with meta‐analyses, of predictive validity (mainly mortality as the outcome) were published (Table 1). 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [14] Bian W, Li Y, Wang Y, et al. Prevalence of malnutrition based on global leadership initiative in malnutrition criteria for completeness of diagnosis and future risk of malnutrition based on current malnutrition diagnosis: systematic review and meta‐analysis. Front Nutr. 2023; 10: 1174945. 37469547 PMC10352804 source
    • cites [15] Sánchez‐Rodríguez D, De Meester D, Minon L, et al. Association between malnutrition assessed by the global leadership initiative on malnutrition criteria and mortality in older people: a scoping review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(7): 5320. 37047936 PMC10094645 source

      The Discussion (page unavailable) says this review examines whether the GLIM criteria predict death in older people, supporting its inclusion as a review of predictive validity with mortality as the outcome. But the same section explicitly calls the review non-systematic, so this source does not support counting it as a systematic review. The claim that there were eight reviews depends on the other cited works, not this paper alone. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [16] Brown D, Loeliger J, Stewart J, et al. Relationship between global leadership initiative on malnutrition (GLIM) defined malnutrition and survival, length of stay and post‐operative complications in people with cancer: a systematic review. Clin Nutr. 2023; 42(3): 255‐ 268. 36716618 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 54
  • May combine two claims. 31
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A list of conditions was provided in the original guidance that could be used to determine assimilation challenges, but severity and duration were not considered at that time.

    “A list of conditions was provided in the original guidance 3 , 4 , 5 that could be used to determine assimilation challenges. However, severity and duration were not considered at that time.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source

      The available indexed passages contain bibliographic metadata, not the guidance itself. Searches for reduced assimilation, gastrointestinal conditions, and severity and duration found no passage addressing either the proposed list of conditions or whether the guidance considered severity and duration. (LLM, conf=0.72)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source

      Section 3.6 (page unavailable) lists conditions associated with reduced nutrient assimilation, supporting the first part of the claim. But it explicitly instructs clinicians to discern severity using factors including frequency and duration of losses, contrary to the claim that severity and duration were not considered. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source

      The Results section, “Reduced food intake or assimilation,” lists conditions associated with reduced assimilation. But the guidance also says to assess severity and note symptom frequency and duration, directly contradicting the claim that severity and duration were not considered. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)

      Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The 2019 GLIM consensus papers provided a framework for a globally accepted diagnostic process that should be valid for adults in most settings, irrespective of methodological availability and resources.

    “These insights culminated in the 2019 GLIM consensus papers that provided a framework for a globally accepted diagnostic process that should be valid for adults in most settings, irrespective of methodological availability and resources.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source

      The title and citation metadata (Abstract entry, pp. 32–40) identify this as a 2019 GLIM consensus report on criteria for diagnosing malnutrition, supporting the attribution of a diagnostic framework. The passages available in our copy do not establish that the process is valid for adults in most settings regardless of methods or resources; searches for those qualifications found no relevant passage. (LLM, conf=0.79)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source

      The consensus procedure and Discussion describe a framework intended for global use, with simple criteria and widely available methods; Section 3.5 offers alternative measures where preferred methods are unavailable. But the Conclusion limits the proposed criteria to adults in clinical settings and calls for validation, so applicability across most settings regardless of resources is stronger than the paper establishes. The indexed copy does not provide page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    GLIM introduced an approach for malnutrition diagnosis in 2019 comprising screening followed by assessment of three phenotypic criteria (weight loss, low BMI, low muscle mass) and two etiologic criteria (reduced food intake/assimilation and inflammation/disease burden).

    “The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) introduced an approach for malnutrition diagnosis in 2019 that comprised screening followed by assessment of three phenotypic criteria (weight loss, low body mass index [BMI], and low muscle mass) and two etiologic criteria (reduced food intake/assimilation and inflammation/disease burden).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    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).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [7] Keller H, de van der Schueren MAE, Jensen GL, et al. Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM): guidance on validation of the operational criteria for the diagnosis of protein‐energy malnutrition in adults. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2020; 44(6): 992‐ 1003. 32529700 source
    • cites [8] de van der Schueren MAE, Keller H, Cederholm T, et al. Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM): guidance on validation of the operational criteria for the diagnosis of protein‐energy malnutrition in adults. Clin Nutr. 2020; 39(9): 2872‐ 2880. 32563597 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Many diagnoses were included in that meta-analysis: cancer, COVID-19, renal failure requiring hemodialysis, inflammatory bowel disease, and cerebrovascular accident.

    “Many diagnoses were included: cancer, COVID‐19, renal failure requiring hemodialysis, inflammatory bowel disease, and cerebrovascular accident. 14”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [14] Bian W, Li Y, Wang Y, et al. Prevalence of malnutrition based on global leadership initiative in malnutrition criteria for completeness of diagnosis and future risk of malnutrition based on current malnutrition diagnosis: systematic review and meta‐analysis. Front Nutr. 2023; 10: 1174945. 37469547 PMC10352804 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The systematic reviews included studies conducted in hospital settings, among community-dwelling older adults, and in nursing homes.

    “The SRs included studies conducted in hospital settings, 14 among community‐dwelling older adults, 15 and in nursing homes. 15”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [14] Bian W, Li Y, Wang Y, et al. Prevalence of malnutrition based on global leadership initiative in malnutrition criteria for completeness of diagnosis and future risk of malnutrition based on current malnutrition diagnosis: systematic review and meta‐analysis. Front Nutr. 2023; 10: 1174945. 37469547 PMC10352804 source
    • cites [15] Sánchez‐Rodríguez D, De Meester D, Minon L, et al. Association between malnutrition assessed by the global leadership initiative on malnutrition criteria and mortality in older people: a scoping review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(7): 5320. 37047936 PMC10094645 source

      The Results report that this review included studies of hospitalized, community-dwelling, and nursing-home older adults. However, the Discussion calls it a scoping review and notes its non-systematic nature, so describing this source as a systematic review is not supported. (LLM, conf=0.89)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Many validated screening tools are now available, with most focusing on identification of individuals who already have signs of malnutrition, whereas others identify risk factors for developing malnutrition.

    “Many validated screening tools are now available, 31 , 32 with most focusing on the identification of individuals who already have signs of malnutrition, whereas others identify risk factors for developing malnutrition. 33 , 34 , 35 , 36”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [31] de van der Schueren MAE, Jager‐Wittenaar H. Malnutrition risk screening: new insights in a new era. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(10): 2163‐ 2168. 36067588 source
    • cites [32] Jager‐Wittenaar H, Sealy M, Naumann E, de van der Schueren M. Nutritional risk screening: a need to guide Alice in Nutritionland. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2024; 27(5): 381‐ 386. 38837037 source
    • cites [33] Power L, Mullally D, Gibney ER, et al. A review of the validity of malnutrition screening tools used in older adults in community and healthcare settings—a MaNuEL study. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2018; 24: 1‐ 13. 29576345 source

      The Overall findings section reports that 34 malnutrition screening tools have been tested for validity in older adults. The What is malnutrition screening? section says tools address both indicators of malnutrition and risk factors, but it does not establish that most focus on existing signs while others focus on future risk. (LLM, conf=0.85)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Among hospitalized patients with malnutrition, there was a 1.2- to 7.2-fold increase in mortality over 4 months; among nursing home patients, 1.3- to 4.7-fold over 1 or 2 years; among community settings, 1.6- to 4.4-fold over 2-14 years.

    “Among hospitalized patients with malnutrition, there was a 1.2‐ to 7.2‐fold increase in mortality over 4 months; among nursing home patients with malnutrition, there was a 1.3‐ to 4.7‐fold increase in mortality over 1 or 2 years; and finally, among patients in community settings with malnutrition, there was a 1.6‐ to 4.4‐fold increase in mortality over 2–14 years. 15”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [15] Sánchez‐Rodríguez D, De Meester D, Minon L, et al. Association between malnutrition assessed by the global leadership initiative on malnutrition criteria and mortality in older people: a scoping review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(7): 5320. 37047936 PMC10094645 source

      The Results section reports associations close to the cited ranges for hospitalized and community-dwelling older people. For nursing-home residents, however, it reports HRs of 1.37–2.41, not an increase up to 4.7-fold. It also gives hospital-study follow-up periods of 4 months to 8 years, rather than a common 4-month period. (LLM, conf=0.91)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    Malnutrition prevalence was 40%-50% on average in that meta-analysis.

    “Malnutrition prevalence was 40%–50% on average. 14”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [14] Bian W, Li Y, Wang Y, et al. Prevalence of malnutrition based on global leadership initiative in malnutrition criteria for completeness of diagnosis and future risk of malnutrition based on current malnutrition diagnosis: systematic review and meta‐analysis. Front Nutr. 2023; 10: 1174945. 37469547 PMC10352804 source

      The Outcomes > Primary outcomes section reports pooled malnutrition prevalence of 39% with two-step diagnosis and 53% with one-step diagnosis. These figures are broadly around the claimed range, but the paper does not report a single average of 40%–50%; prevalence depends on the diagnostic approach. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    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.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [7] Keller H, de van der Schueren MAE, Jensen GL, et al. Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM): guidance on validation of the operational criteria for the diagnosis of protein‐energy malnutrition in adults. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2020; 44(6): 992‐ 1003. 32529700 source

      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
    • cites [8] de van der Schueren MAE, Keller H, Cederholm T, et al. Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM): guidance on validation of the operational criteria for the diagnosis of protein‐energy malnutrition in adults. Clin Nutr. 2020; 39(9): 2872‐ 2880. 32563597 source

      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

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Among the 64 articles in that meta-analysis, 34 were from Asia, 20 from Europe, nine from the Americas, and one from Oceania.

    “Among the 64 articles, 34 were from Asia, 20 from Europe, nine from the Americas, and one from Oceania.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [14] Bian W, Li Y, Wang Y, et al. Prevalence of malnutrition based on global leadership initiative in malnutrition criteria for completeness of diagnosis and future risk of malnutrition based on current malnutrition diagnosis: systematic review and meta‐analysis. Front Nutr. 2023; 10: 1174945. 37469547 PMC10352804 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    A smaller meta-analysis of five intensive care unit studies concluded that the small sample of 337 patients and heterogeneity limited the resulting sensitivity to 65.5% (95% CI, 35%-86.8%); specificity was 86.9% (95% CI, 59.3%-96.9%).

    “A smaller meta‐analysis that included five intensive care unit studies concluded that the small sample of 337 patients and the heterogeneity limited the resulting sensitivity to 65.5% (95% CI, 35%–86.8%). Specificity was 86.9% (95% CI, 59.3%–96.9%). 13”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [13] Díaz G, Correia MITD, Gonzalez MC, Reyes M. The global leadership initiative on malnutrition criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition inpatients admitted to the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clin Nutr. 2023; 42(2): 182‐ 189. 36599273 source

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

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Critical illness or sepsis and exacerbations of COPD or Crohn's disease are examples of acute diseases or conditions that may be associated with acute inflammation of severe/moderate degree.

    “Examples of acute diseases or conditions that may be associated with acute inflammation of severe/moderate degree include critical illness or sepsis and exacerbations of COPD or Crohn's disease.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    A GLIM working group undertook a robust modified Delphi process to provide comprehensive guidance.

    “A GLIM working group, therefore, undertook a robust modified Delphi process to provide comprehensive guidance. 59 , 60”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Congestive heart failure, cancer, and chronic kidney disease are examples of diseases that may be associated with chronic inflammation of mild/moderate degree.

    “Examples of diseases that may be associated with chronic inflammation of mild/moderate degree include congestive heart failure, cancer, and chronic kidney disease.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    The documentation of laboratory markers indicating inflammation may support confirmation of the inflammation criterion.

    “The documentation of laboratory markers indicating inflammation may support confirmation of the inflammation criterion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    Repeated measures of CRP higher than the upper cutoff level of the selected clinical laboratory support the presence of chronic inflammation.

    “Serial measurements of CRP are recommended, and repeated measures higher than the upper cutoff level of the selected clinical laboratory support the presence of chronic inflammation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationcitation

    The sound interpretation of some indicators of inflammatory disease or condition requires clinical training and expertise.

    “The sound interpretation of some of these indicators requires clinical training and expertise.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning

    A GLIM working group later published guidance on how to measure muscle mass and define low muscle mass.

    “For this reason, a GLIM working group later published such guidance. 40 , 41”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [40] Barazzoni R, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the muscle mass phenotypic criterion for the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) diagnosis of malnutrition. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(6): 1425‐ 1433. 35450768 source
    • cites [41] Compher C, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the muscle mass phenotypic criterion for the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition diagnosis of malnutrition. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2022; 46(6): 1232‐ 1242. 35437785 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    MRI can be considered a gold-standard method for accuracy, but MRI is not routinely available for assessment of muscle mass.

    “Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be considered a gold‐standard method for accuracy, 42 but MRI is not routinely available for the assessment of muscle mass. 40 , 41 , 42”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [42] Huber FA, Del Grande F, Rizzo S, Guglielmi G, Guggenberger R. MRI in the assessment of adipose tissues and muscle composition: how to use it. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2020; 10(8): 1636‐ 1649. 32742957 PMC7378099 source
    • cites [40] Barazzoni R, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the muscle mass phenotypic criterion for the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) diagnosis of malnutrition. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(6): 1425‐ 1433. 35450768 source

      Section 3.1.4.2 says MRI is unlikely to be available for routine clinical practice, supporting the availability claim. However, section 3.1.1.3 says that no criterion-standard or superior technique is currently acknowledged, so the paper does not support calling MRI a gold standard for accuracy. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [41] Compher C, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the muscle mass phenotypic criterion for the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition diagnosis of malnutrition. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2022; 46(6): 1232‐ 1242. 35437785 source

      The 'Level of agreement 79%' section says MRI is unlikely to be available for routine clinical practice, supporting the availability claim. But 'General commentary and conclusions (Figure 2)' says no criterion-standard or superior technique is currently acknowledged, so this paper does not support calling MRI a gold standard for accuracy. Page numbers are not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Anorexia of aging may explain loss of appetite experienced by some persons of advanced age who do not appear to have known disease conditions that affect appetite and are not receiving known appetite-suppressing treatments; such individuals do appear to have low-grade inflammation and associated hunger-satiety imbalance.

    ““Anorexia of aging” may explain the loss of appetite experienced by some persons of advanced age who do not appear to have known disease conditions that affect appetite and are not receiving known appetite‐suppressing treatments. Such individuals do appear to have low‐grade inflammation and associated hunger‐satiety imbalance. 58 , 59”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [58] Morley JE, Thomas DR. Anorexia and aging: pathophysiology. Nutrition. 1999; 15(6): 499‐ 503. 10378207 source
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source

      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

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    A recent consensus initiative on sarcopenic obesity proposed to normalize muscle mass for total body weight.

    “A recent consensus initiative on sarcopenic obesity proposed to normalize muscle mass for total body weight. 46”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [46] Donini LM, Busetto L, Bischoff SC, et al. Definition and diagnostic criteria for sarcopenic obesity: ESPEN and EASO consensus statement. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(4): 990‐ 1000. 35227529 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given

    Disease conditions that have no clear or perceptible inflammatory components will not fulfill the disease burden/inflammation criterion unless confirmed by laboratory analyses.

    “Disease conditions that have no clear or perceptible inflammatory components will not fulfill the disease burden/inflammation criterion unless confirmed by laboratory analyses.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The occurrence of acute or chronic disease, infection, or injury that is often/usually associated with inflammatory activity may fulfill the GLIM disease burden/inflammation criterion, and confirmation by laboratory markers is not always necessary.

    “The occurrence of acute or chronic disease, infection, or injury that is often/usually associated with inflammatory activity may fulfill the GLIM disease burden/inflammation criterion, and confirmation by laboratory markers is not always necessary.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    Thresholds for reduced muscle mass need to be adapted to race (Asia).

    “Thresholds for reduced muscle mass need to be adapted to race (Asia).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source

      The indexed Abstract names reduced muscle mass as a diagnostic criterion, but does not discuss thresholds or adapting them by race. Searches for Asian populations, ethnicity, and muscle-mass cutoffs found no passage addressing that recommendation. (LLM, conf=0.70)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Calf circumference may be considered in the absence of machine-based techniques to evaluate muscle mass, and clinical judgment of inflammatory disease burden may only require laboratory confirmation (by CRP) in cases of uncertainty.

    “Two GLIM working groups have since provided more detailed guidance; ie, calf circumference may be considered in the absence of machine‐based techniques to evaluate muscle mass, 40 , 41 and clinical judgment of inflammatory disease burden may only require laboratory confirmation (by CRP) in cases of uncertainty. 59 , 60”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim4 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [40] Barazzoni R, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the muscle mass phenotypic criterion for the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) diagnosis of malnutrition. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(6): 1425‐ 1433. 35450768 source
    • cites [41] Compher C, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the muscle mass phenotypic criterion for the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition diagnosis of malnutrition. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2022; 46(6): 1232‐ 1242. 35437785 source
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    When machine-based techniques are not available or by regional preference, physical examination or standard anthropometric measures such as calf circumference or mid-arm muscle circumference may be used to evaluate muscle mass.

    “When not available or by regional preference, physical examination or standard anthropometric measures such as calf circumference or mid‐arm muscle circumference may be used.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [40] Barazzoni R, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the muscle mass phenotypic criterion for the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) diagnosis of malnutrition. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(6): 1425‐ 1433. 35450768 source
    • cites [41] Compher C, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the muscle mass phenotypic criterion for the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition diagnosis of malnutrition. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2022; 46(6): 1232‐ 1242. 35437785 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Chronic disease-related inflammation is generally mild to moderate and often recurrent and is likely to be associated with malignant disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, chronic renal disease, or any disease with chronic or recurrent inflammation.

    “Chronic disease‐related inflammation is generally mild to moderate and often recurrent and is likely to be associated with malignant disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, chronic renal disease, or any disease with chronic or recurrent inflammation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source

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

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    A discussion has been opened with the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) group at WHO in Geneva with the aim of modernizing the ICD codes for malnutrition through the use of common key variables that are shared across the leading approaches to malnutrition diagnosis.

    “More recently, a discussion has been opened with the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) group at WHO in Geneva with the aim of modernizing the ICD codes for malnutrition through the use of common key variables that are shared across the leading approaches to malnutrition diagnosis. 61”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [61] Cederholm T, Rothenberg E, Barazzoni R. A clinically relevant diagnosis code for “Malnutrition in adults” is needed in ICD‐11. J Nutr Health Aging. 2022; 26(4): 314‐ 315. 35450984 source

      The “Code for ‘Malnutrition in adults’ as an amendment for ICD-11” section says that nutrition-community representatives proposed an ICD-11 amendment to WHO in late 2020. “Diagnostic criteria currently used” says leading approaches share phenotypic and etiologic criteria. The copy does not establish that a discussion had opened with WHO’s ICD group in Geneva; it documents a proposal, not a dialogue. (LLM, conf=0.85)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Parallel initiatives within the scientific community are seeking to address the issue of assessing muscle mass in obesity.

    “Parallel initiatives within the scientific community are seeking to address this issue. 46”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [46] Donini LM, Busetto L, Bischoff SC, et al. Definition and diagnostic criteria for sarcopenic obesity: ESPEN and EASO consensus statement. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(4): 990‐ 1000. 35227529 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    At least one phenotypic criterion and one etiologic criterion are required for the diagnosis of malnutrition.

    “At least one phenotypic criterion and one etiologic criterion are required for the diagnosis of malnutrition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source

      The searches returned the stated criterion only in material labeled Abstract, with no matching passage from the paper’s full text. Under the evidence restriction, the available passages do not verify the claim. (LLM, conf=0.65)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    C-reactive protein may be used as a supportive laboratory measure for the inflammation criterion.

    “C‐reactive protein may be used as a supportive laboratory measure.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [59] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024; 48(2): 145‐ 154. 38221842 source
    • cites [60] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Ballesteros‐Pomar MD, et al. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: a modified Delphi approach. Clin Nutr. 2024; 43(5): 1025‐ 1032. 38238189 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    The assessment of muscle mass in the setting of obesity is particularly challenging.

    “The assessment of muscle mass in the setting of obesity is particularly challenging.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [46] Donini LM, Busetto L, Bischoff SC, et al. Definition and diagnostic criteria for sarcopenic obesity: ESPEN and EASO consensus statement. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(4): 990‐ 1000. 35227529 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    Transient inflammation of a mild degree does not meet the threshold for the etiologic criterion of inflammation.

    “Note that transient inflammation of a mild degree does not meet the threshold for this etiologic criterion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source

      The available Abstract identifies inflammation or disease burden as an etiologic criterion, but does not say whether mild, transient inflammation meets it. Searches for the quoted threshold and for mild or transient inflammation found no passage addressing that distinction; the decisive text may be absent from the available copy. (LLM, conf=0.70)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Gastrointestinal symptoms can impair food intake or absorption and should be considered supportive indicators.

    “Consider gastrointestinal symptoms as supportive indicators that can impair food intake or absorption (dysphagia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, or abdominal pain).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source

      The available indexed passages contain bibliographic information but no discussion of gastrointestinal symptoms. Searches for “supportive indicators” and “reduced food intake or assimilation” found no passage addressing the claim, so the available copy cannot verify it. (LLM, conf=0.72)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Bioelectrical impedance analysis, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound are methods that can be used to evaluate muscle mass when experience and relevant reference values are available.

    “Bioelectrical impedance analysis, dual‐energy x‐ray absorptiometry, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound are methods that can be used when experience and relevant reference values are available.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [3] Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019; 43(1): 32‐ 40. 30175461 source

      The available Abstract (page not indicated) identifies reduced muscle mass as a malnutrition criterion but does not describe how to measure it. Searches for the named imaging and impedance methods, ultrasound, and reference values found no passage addressing the claimed methods or conditions of use. (LLM, conf=0.72)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [4] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019; 38(1): 1‐ 9. 30181091 source
    • cites [5] Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition—a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 207‐ 217. 30920778 PMC6438340 source

      In Results > Reduced muscle mass (page not provided), the paper recommends all five listed methods for measuring muscle mass and discusses reference standards and cut-off values. It does not state that their use depends on the availability of experience, so that condition is not supported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingnone given

    More than 400 scientific reports were published in peer-reviewed journals between 2019 and May 2024 on GLIM, forming the basis of 10 systematic reviews.

    “More than 400 scientific reports were published in peer‐reviewed journals, forming the basis of 10 systematic reviews”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    During 2019 to May 2024, the three original GLIM consensus papers were cited more than 5000 times in Google Scholar, more than 2300 times in Scopus, and more than 3000 times in Web of Science.

    “During the same period (2019 to May 2024), the three original GLIM consensus papers have been cited >5000 times in Google Scholar, >2300 times in Scopus, and >3000 times in Web of Science.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Eight systematic reviews focus on predictive validity and encompass approximately 100 studies with more than 100,000 patients.

    “Eight focus on predictive validity and encompass approximately 100 studies with >100,000 patients.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    General results from more than 1500 respondents indicated either the GLIM consensus had been implemented (25%) or its implementation was in process (20%).

    “General results from >1500 respondents indicated either the GLIM consensus had been implemented (25%) or its implementation was in process (20%). 22 , 23”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [22] Malone A. Implementation of GLIM – Facilitators and Obstacles. Presented at: 45th ESPEN Congress on Clinical Nutrition & Metabolism; September 11‐14, 2023; Lyon, France.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [23] Jager‐Wittenaar H. GLIM implementation in practice & research: Results from the GLIM Implementation survey. Presented at: Optimal Nutrition Care for All International Conference; June 15‐16, 2023; Amsterdam, Netherlands. Accessed April 3, 2025. https://european-nutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Harriet-Jager-ONCA_GLIM-Implementation.pdf

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The systematic reviews are based on major validation studies and include studies from diverse regions of the world.

    “The SRs are based on major validation studies and include studies from diverse regions of the world.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    WHO Europe has published, in collaboration with ESPEN, two fact sheets on disease-related malnutrition and tuberculosis, both quoting the GLIM criteria as a suggested malnutrition diagnostic tool.

    “WHO Europe has also published, in collaboration with ESPEN, two fact sheets on disease‐related malnutrition 29 and tuberculosis, 30 both quoting the GLIM criteria as a suggested malnutrition diagnostic tool.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [29] World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe. Disease‐Related Malnutrition: A Time for Action. World Health Organization; ‎ 2023. Accessed Aprl 3, 2025. https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/375033

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [30] World Health Organization. Tuberculosis and Malnutrition. World Health Organization; 2024. Accessed April 3, 2025. https://www.who.int/europe/publications/m/item/tuberculosis-and-malnutrition-factsheet

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Mortality and disease-free survival were consistently worse among those diagnosed with malnutrition by GLIM, and these clinical outcomes were even worse for severe compared with moderate malnutrition.

    “Mortality and disease‐free survival were consistently worse among those diagnosed with malnutrition by the GLIM approach, and these clinical outcomes were even worse for those patients with severe compared with moderate malnutrition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [16] Brown D, Loeliger J, Stewart J, et al. Relationship between global leadership initiative on malnutrition (GLIM) defined malnutrition and survival, length of stay and post‐operative complications in people with cancer: a systematic review. Clin Nutr. 2023; 42(3): 255‐ 268. 36716618 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    Malnutrition prevalence was 44% in the total sample of that meta-analysis.

    “Malnutrition prevalence was 44% in the total sample. 12”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [12] Huo Z, Chong F, Yin L, Lu Z, Liu J, Xu H. Accuracy of the GLIM criteria for diagnosing malnutrition: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(6): 1208‐ 1217. 35504163 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of those who had implemented GLIM or were in progress, 63% reported hospital settings, 19% private practice or primary care, and 5% long-term care (total of 100% included other workplace settings; n=574 respondents).

    “Of those who had implemented GLIM or were in progress, 63% reported to be in hospital settings, 19% in private practice or primary care, and 5% in long‐term care (total of 100% included “other” workplace settings; n = 574 respondents).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    After two rounds of review and revision, the working group secured 100% agreement with the conclusions reported in the 5-year update.

    “After two rounds of review and revision, the working group secured 100% agreement with the conclusions reported in the 5‐year update.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    The GLIM approach was primarily intended not to supplant other diagnostic methods used by nutrition experts but to integrate shared variables when possible.

    “The GLIM approach was primarily intended not to supplant other diagnostic methods in use by nutrition experts but rather to integrate the shared variables when possible.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Because the phenotypic and etiologic criteria were selected from widely accepted diagnostic models introduced over the past 50 years, the GLIM Consortium decided in 2019 to recommend immediate implementation while promoting ongoing validation studies.

    “Because the phenotypic and etiologic criteria were selected from widely accepted diagnostic models introduced over the past 50 years, the GLIM Consortium decided in 2019 to recommend immediate implementation while promoting ongoing validation studies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Breakthroughs in understanding malnutrition in disease/inflammation settings supported a changing paradigm in how malnutrition is characterized in clinical settings.

    “Breakthroughs in our understanding of malnutrition in settings of disease/inflammation have supported a changing paradigm in how we fundamentally characterize malnutrition in clinical settings.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The first draft of the consensus document went through two rounds of revision until consensus was reached at a threshold level of at least 75% agreement.

    “the text went through two rounds of revision until a consensus was reached at a threshold level of at least 75% agreement.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The original consensus document stated that the GLIM consensus should be re-evaluated based upon review of new studies and advances in screening and assessment every 3-5 years.

    “The original consensus document stated, “The GLIM consensus should be re‐evaluated based upon review of new studies and advances in screening and assessment every 3–5 years.””
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Adoption and implementation of new practices have generally been shown to take from 17 to 20 years.

    “the adoption and implementation of new practices have generally been shown to take from 17 to 20 years. 24”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [24] Bauer MS, Kirchner J. Implementation science: what is it and why should I care? Psychiatry Res. 2020; 283: 112376. 31036287 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    A limitation of these reviews is that some of the same studies are included in multiple reviews.

    “A limitation of these reviews is that some of the same studies are included in multiple reviews.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Tools focusing on identifying existing malnutrition mostly use similar sets of variables (weight loss, low BMI, and disease burden), but these variables are combined in various manners and applied with different cutoff values.

    “Tools focusing on identifying existing malnutrition mostly use similar sets of variables (weight loss, low BMI, and disease burden), but these variables are combined in various manners and applied with different cutoff values.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    In the original GLIM paper, decisions on cutoffs for weight loss were based on a consensus process accounting for recommendations from major established screening and diagnostic instruments.

    “In the GLIM original paper, the decisions on cutoffs for weight loss were based on a consensus process accounting for recommendations from the major established screening and diagnostic instruments.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    With an area under the curve of 0.82, the authors stated that GLIM has good diagnostic accuracy.

    “With an area under the curve of 0.82, the authors stated that GLIM has good diagnostic accuracy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [12] Huo Z, Chong F, Yin L, Lu Z, Liu J, Xu H. Accuracy of the GLIM criteria for diagnosing malnutrition: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clin Nutr. 2022; 41(6): 1208‐ 1217. 35504163 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Because GLIM, AAIM, and SGA use similar variables, having staff members gather data using these established AAIM or SGA frameworks enables a crosswalk to the GLIM structure.

    “Because GLIM, AAIM, and SGA use similar variables, having staff members gather data using these established AAIM or SGA frameworks enables a crosswalk to the GLIM structure.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given

    The GLIM Consortium does not currently identify a rationale to warrant changes in the recommendations for severity grading for any of the phenotypic criteria.

    “The GLIM Consortium does not currently identify a rationale to warrant changes in the recommendations for severity grading for any of the phenotypic criteria (Table 4).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    The original consensus paper recommended severity grading (moderate or severe malnutrition) based on any of the three phenotypic criteria.

    “The original consensus paper recommended severity grading (moderate or severe malnutrition) based on any of the three phenotypic criteria.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    GLIM has undergone extensive validation and has a well-established evidence base.

    “The results indicate that GLIM has undergone extensive validation and has a well‐established evidence base.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given

    The GLIM approach has found a positive reception within the global clinical nutrition community.

    “The GLIM approach has found a positive reception within the global clinical nutrition community; ie, GLIM appears to have the potential to become widely adopted as a practical framework for the diagnosis of malnutrition in diverse clinical settings with widely variable resource availability.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    To exclude the diagnosis of malnutrition, all five criteria need to be measured.

    “To exclude the diagnosis of malnutrition, all five criteria need to be measured.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    The original GLIM consensus papers did not provide the detailed guidance needed to assess inflammation in support of malnutrition diagnosis.

    “However, the original GLIM consensus papers did not provide the detailed guidance needed to assess inflammation in support of malnutrition diagnosis.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Many diseases or conditions are of inflammatory origin and/or elicit inflammatory responses.

    “There is a strong consensus that many diseases or conditions are of inflammatory origin and/or elicit inflammatory responses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    The original GLIM consensus did not provide detailed information on how to measure muscle mass or how to define low muscle mass.

    “The original GLIM consensus did not provide detailed information on how to measure muscle mass or how to define low muscle mass.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    It is not currently possible to broadly attempt a distinction between moderate and severe reductions of muscle mass because only some of the current methodological approaches allow for this level of differentiation.

    “Unfortunately, it is not currently possible to broadly attempt a distinction between moderate and severe reductions of muscle mass because only some of the current methodological approaches allow for this level of differentiation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    The GLIM approach endorses core phenotypic and etiologic criteria that are already in widespread use throughout the world.

    “The GLIM approach endorses core phenotypic and etiologic criteria that are already in widespread use throughout the world.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    There is no standardized approach for assessment or interpretation of inadequate intake/assimilation.

    “As there is no standardized approach for assessment or interpretation of inadequate intake/assimilation, the GLIM Consortium has appointed a working group to consider this criterion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Variations in prevalence, sensitivity, and specificity between studies may possibly relate to the fact that some of the studies did not use all five GLIM criteria or that the populations evaluated vary.

    “Variations in prevalence, sensitivity, and specificity between studies may possibly relate to the fact that some of the studies did not use all five GLIM criteria or that the populations evaluated vary.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    In the original consensus publication, there remained uncertainties as how to assess the phenotypic criterion on low muscle mass and the etiologic criterion on inflammation/high disease burden.

    “In the original consensus publication, there remained uncertainties as how to assess the phenotypic criterion on low muscle mass and the etiologic criterion on inflammation/high disease burden.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    For the phenotypic criteria of nonvolitional weight loss and low BMI, no new data justify any changes from the original recommendations.

    “For the phenotypic criteria of nonvolitional weight loss and low BMI, no new data justify any changes from the original recommendations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    The GLIM Consortium is an active participant in efforts to address malnutrition in obesity.

    “The GLIM Consortium is an active participant in these efforts.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    In 2019, the GLIM Consortium foresaw securing endorsements from leading nutrition professional societies and set priorities to promote dissemination, validation testing, and feedback.

    “In 2019, the GLIM Consortium foresaw securing endorsements from leading nutrition professional societies and set priorities to promote dissemination, validation testing, and feedback.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
73 of 73

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Global consensus to define the risk of malnutrition is not established.

    “Global consensus to define the “risk of malnutrition” is not established.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Low BMI/underweight is a common global indicator of malnutrition associated with unfavorable outcomes.

    “However, low BMI/underweight is a common global indicator of malnutrition associated with unfavorable outcomes.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Determination of BMI is an established and easily performed practice for most clinical encounters.

    “Determination of BMI is an established and easily performed practice for most clinical encounters.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most body composition assessment tools have limitations in their application to adults living with obesity and may need specific adjustments for muscle mass assessment.

    “Most body composition assessment tools have limitations in their application to adults living with obesity and may need specific adjustments for muscle mass assessment.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Malnutrition may result from inflammation-driven catabolic muscle loss, anorexia, altered metabolism, and associated micronutrient deficiencies.

    “Malnutrition may result from inflammation‐driven catabolic muscle loss, anorexia, altered metabolism, and associated micronutrient deficiencies.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Malnutrition is a common occurrence among individuals living with obesity, especially in the form of deficiencies of protein, essential nutrients, and micronutrients.

    “Malnutrition is a common occurrence among individuals living with obesity, especially in the form of deficiencies of protein, essential nutrients, and micronutrients.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The ICD scheme guides clinical diagnosis and reimbursement across much of the world.

    “As the current ICD‐11 edition does not have a code for malnutrition/undernutrition in adults, this revision is a high priority because the ICD scheme guides clinical diagnosis and reimbursement across much of the world.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Clinical judgment can reliably integrate underlying diagnosis or condition, clinical signs, and/or laboratory markers to confirm the presence of inflammatory disease or condition.

    “Clinical judgment based on integration of underlying diagnosis or condition, clinical signs, and/or laboratory markers should guide confirmation of the presence of inflammatory disease or condition.”
8 of 8

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Food-intake threshold differs between the text and Table 5

    Minor

    The text says intake must be below 50% of the calculated energy requirement for more than a week, whereas Table 5 allows intake equal to 50%. A patient at exactly 50% therefore meets the criterion under the table but not under the text.

  • Moderate weight-loss grade includes diagnostic cutoff values

    Minor

    Table 4 includes exactly 5% weight loss within six months and exactly 10% beyond six months in the moderate-malnutrition grade. Table 5 requires weight loss greater than those respective values to meet the diagnostic criterion.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Jager‐Wittenaar H. GLIM implementation in practice & research: Results from the GLIM Implementation survey. Presented at: Optimal Nutrition Care for All International Conference; June 15‐16 2023; Amsterdam Netherlands. Accessed April 3 2025.https://european-nutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Harriet-Jager-ONCA_GLIM-Implementation.pdf
  2. Winkler M. Incorporating GLIM with the Academy/ASPEN Malnutrition Diagnostic Approach. Presented at: ASPEN 2024 Nutrition Science & Practice Conference; March 2‐5 2024; Tampa FL.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Jensen, G. L., Cederholm, T., Correia, M. I. T. D., Gonzalez, M. C., Fukushima, R., Pisprasert, V., Blaauw, R., Braz, D. C., Carrasco, F., Cruz Jentoft, A. J., Cuerda, C., Evans, D. C., Fuchs‐Tarlovsky, V., Gramlich, L., Shi, H. P., Hasse, J. M., Hiesmayr, M., Hiki, N., Jager‐Wittenaar, H., Jahit, S., Jáquez, A., Keller, H., Klek, S., Malone, A., Mogensen, K. M., Mori, N., Mundi, M., Muscaritoli, M., Ng, D., Nyulasi, I., Pirlich, M., Schneider, S., de van der Schueren, M., Siltharm, S., Singer, P., Steiber, A., Tappenden, K. A., Yu, J., van Gossum, A., Wang, J., Winkler, M. F., Compher, C., & Barazzoni, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Vermont (US)
  • Uppsala University (SE)
  • Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (BR)
  • Postgraduate Program in Nutrition and Food, Federal University of Pelotas RS Brazil
  • Teikyo Heisei University (JP)
  • Khon Kaen University (TH)
  • Division of Human Nutrition Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University Cape Town South Africa
  • Nutrition Unit, Gustave Roussy Villejuif France
  • Department of Nutrition, Faculty of Medicine University of Chile Santiago Chile
  • Servicio de Geriatría Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal (IRYCIS) Madrid Spain
  • Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón (ES)
  • OhioHealth (US)
  • Hospital General de México (MX)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • Department of GI Surgery, Department of Clinical Nutrition Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University Beijing China
  • Baylor University Medical Center (US)
  • Medical University of Vienna (AT)
  • Kitasato University (JP)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • National Cancer Institute Putrajaya Malaysia
  • Pontificia Universidad Católica Madre y Maestra (DO)
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
  • Surgical Oncology Clinic, The Maria Sklodowska‐Curie National Cancer Institute Krakow Poland
  • American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Aichi Medical University (JP)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
  • Tan Tock Seng Hospital (SG)
  • La Trobe University (AU)
  • Imperial Oak Outpatient Clinic, Endocrinology, Gastroenterology and Clinical Nutrition Berlin Germany
  • Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department Nice University Hospital, Côte d'Azur University Nice France
  • Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Lifestyle HAN University of Applied Sciences Nijmegen the Netherlands
  • Ministry of Science and Technology Thailand (TH)
  • Reichman University (IL)
  • Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN)
  • Department of Gastroenterology and Clinical Nutrition, Hospital Universitaire de Bruxelles (HUB) Free University of Brussels Brussels Belgium
  • Kaohsiung Medical University (TW)
  • Brown University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of Trieste (IT)
Corresponding author
Jensen, Gordon L.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2025-04-14
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
414-427
ISSN
  • 0148-6071 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-2444
DOI
10.1002/jpen.2756
PMC
PMC12053077
OpenAlex
W4409436043
Cited by
75
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 60 · 2025: 15
FWCI
39.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Uppsala University Publications (Uppsala University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • Danone
  • Nestlé Health Science
  • Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
  • Administration for Community Living
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
malnutrition diagnosis, GLIM criteria, GLIM, low muscle mass, weight loss, low body mass index, hypophagia, malnutrition screening, obesity
MeSH terms
Consensus Statements as Topic, Humans, Weight Loss, Nutrition Assessment, Body Mass Index, Consensus, 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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-20.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-20.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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